From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera Munoz <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
Date: | 2004-05-19 14:19:41 |
Message-ID: | 20040519111858.N5739@ganymede.hub.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 19 May 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > There is no such thing as "too close to feature freeze", nor has there
> > ever been in the past ... other then missing it altogether. Unless there
> > are some serious flaws in the implementation, submitting it on May 31st
> > would get it in ...it isn't expecting to be rock solid, bug free, that is
> > what the beta period is to work out ...
> >
> > What is expected, though, is that you won't disappear after its committed,
> > so that you can fix any bugs reported in a timely manner ...
>
> Not completely true. If a patch needs major rework or the implemention
> isn't acceptable, it might be rejected and have to wait --- it has
> happened before, and PITR might not make it because the April 1 patch
> wasn't an acceptable implementation.
Which is why I stateed "unless there are some serious flaws in ... " :)
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-05-19 14:44:08 | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2004-05-19 14:18:13 | postgresql extension API proof of concept |