Robert Treat wrote:
> On Monday 29 November 2004 23:52, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>>Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
>>
>>>don't we normally announce if initdb is required on new beta releases? We
>>>should.
>>
>>It was sloppy that we didn't do that for beta5, and I apologize for it.
>>
>>One problem is that we don't have a defined place for per-beta-version
>>release notes. The current structure of release.sgml doesn't cater for
>>it --- and I doubt we want to permanently memorialize beta-version
>>issues anyway. Any thoughts?
>>
>
>
> Do the beta changelogs ever end up any place permanent?
> (ftp://ftp.postgresql.org/pub/source/v8.0.0beta/ChangeLog-Beta4-to-Beta5)
> We could put a more prominant "**INITDB REQUIRED**" announcement in those when
> it is required.
Yes, some kind of information "initdb required because column xxx was
dropped" would be helpful. When scanning the whole beta4-to-beta5 file,
you'd easily miss the consequence of the 2004-11-05 patch ("remove
concept of a schema having an associated tablespace").
Regards,
Andreas