Re: Time-based Releases WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stuart Bishop <stuart(at)stuartbishop(dot)net>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Time-based Releases WAS: 8.5 release timetable, again
Date: 2009-09-08 16:03:23
Message-ID: 162867790909080903qf51ccdfrc2454242a2f6277c@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> I personally suspect PostgreSQL would want a 1 year cycle for major
> releases while a full dump/reload is required for upgrades. When this
> changes, 6 or even 4 months might actually be a good fit.
>

For some DBA specialist is 1 year cycle too much fast. I thing, so 1
year cycle is perfect for databases. Migration to new database
releases is some different then migration to new program. You have to
be more carefully, because wrong database could to destroy your data.
Normal use case for using a new version contains one year waiting. I
afraid so too much short cycle can break clean postgresql's release
process.

regards
Pavel Stehule

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kristian Larsson 2009-09-08 16:04:34 Re: Adding integers ( > 8 bytes) to an inet
Previous Message Kristian Larsson 2009-09-08 15:58:01 Re: Adding integers ( > 8 bytes) to an inet