Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2009/07/22 22:09, Nick Holland wrote:
>> Henning Brauer wrote:
>> >
>> > the upgrade47.html entry is the most important really.
>>
>> I'm inclined to agree. I may be biased, but really...a mail list
>> or chat board posting over 10 months before the 4.7 release day?
>
> This is important, but I think the first step should be current.html.
>
> I don't see any reason to avoid listing major changes needed for port
> updates there. Everybody following -current should be looking for
> changes to that page and acting on any which affect them.
Seems a few of us came up with that idea at about the same time.
So... let's use the same rules we used for the upgradeXX.html
advisories:
1) The upgrade is more traumatic than typical (for example,
requiring PRE-upgrade actions)
2) the package is in moderately wide-spread use.
As Henning just put it clearer and more concisely than I could:
pkg_add -ui + current.html/upgradeXX.html => no surprises.
The postgresql change clearly fits this.
The goal is to be timely. If you have something you think fits this
criteria, please write and commit the change. If we disagree, we'll
remove it (or clean it up) later. If you aren't sure, ask me or key
porting people, but don't need ok's for clearly correct additions.
Key thing, though: make sure you mark off the change with a [ports]
to mark it clearly as a non-base system issue.
I'm not claiming infallibility here, changes may occur in the
details. :)
Nick.
