| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Ericson Smith <eric(at)did-it(dot)com>, Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Patrick MacDonald <patrickm(at)redhat(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: 7.4? |
| Date: | 2003-03-06 20:44:34 |
| Message-ID: | 17998.1046983474@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 2003-03-06 at 11:50, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> So you were thinking of beta for May 1?
> Rather than picking an arbitrary date for the beta, wouldn't it make
> more sense to simply put out the beta when a particular set of features
> are finished (say, Win32 + PITR + ...)
We did that for 7.1, and again in 7.2; and it was a bad mistake both
times, because we found ourselves in a state where "it's almost done
except X" --- and no one except the person working on X could really
do any further development.
For 7.3 we agreed to set a firm feature-freeze cutoff date well in
advance. That worked a *lot* better, and I'd like to stick with that
approach.
I don't actually much care whether the cutoff is May 1 or June 1 or
whatever. But I want it set in advance, and stuck to, so that people
can plan their own efforts without wondering what will be happening.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | valerian | 2003-03-06 20:49:39 | index on lower(column) is very slow |
| Previous Message | Andrew Overholt | 2003-03-06 20:38:44 | Re: => or =# |