| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10 |
| Date: | 2017-03-29 19:10:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20170329191012.y54gohqroagjwa2t@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-03-29 16:04:50 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > My own thought is that there's room for at least a few days' slop in
> > the end date of the final commitfest, depending on what patches remain
> > open and what the prospects are for getting them done. (In the past
> > we've sometimes let the final fest stretch on indefinitely, which is
> > clearly the Wrong Thing; but that doesn't mean that the Right Thing is
> > to say that it ends at 2017-04-01 00:00 UTC no matter what.) The RMT
> > should look at things in another day or two and make a judgment call
> > about that.
>
> I was rather surprised to see the March commitfest declared to exactly
> one month and feature freeze immediately thereafter. Last time around
> we left 2 weeks between CF end and feature freeze; the previous one I
> think we had the final CF last two months. Not stretch on indefinitely,
> but we know the final CF for a cycle takes more effort than previous
> ones, so it seems reasonable to give more time. We have a large number
> of patches still waiting for review.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-03-29 19:21:54 | Re: pg_dump truncating queries in error messages |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-29 19:09:24 | Re: Schedule and Release Management Team for PG10 |