Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode

David,

* David G. Johnston (david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Just *when* is git ready for testing? You don't know from the outside.
> >
> > I do lurk here a lot and still am unsure quite often.
> >
> > Even simply releasing an alpha *tarball* would be useful enough. What
> > is needed is the signal to test, rather than a fully-built package.
> >
> >
> IIUC the master branch is always ready for testing.
>
> I do not think the project cares whether everyone is testing the exact
> same codebase; as long as test findings include the relevant commit hash
> the results will be informative.

For my 2c, I do believe it's useful for projects which are based on PG
or which work with PG to have a 'alpha1' tag to refer to. Asking users
to test with git hash XYZABC isn't great. Getting more users of
applications which use PG to do testing is, in my view at least, a great
way to improve our test coverage and I do think having an alpha will
help with that.

That said, I'm not pushing to have one released this week or before
PGCon or any such- let's get the back-branch releases dealt with and
then we can get an alpha out.

Thanks!

Stephen