From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Feature freeze progress report |
Date: | 2007-04-29 16:53:30 |
Message-ID: | 24377.1177865610@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> writes:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>> My thinking is to move to a two stage release process: Do one
>> "production" release annually, and one "dev" release at the 6 month
>> mid-point.
> I'm not really convinced that this is good idea at all - it would lead
> to further fragmentation of developer resources (likely more versions to
> support and more frequent releases which to put quite a load on
> developers by itself).
That's my reaction too. The overhead of a "dev" release would be just
as high as a full release, and we don't really have enough manpower
to do two releases a year. We *definitely* haven't got enough manpower
to double the number of back branches we are trying to keep patched.
So this could only work if dev releases are abandoned from a support
perspective when the next full release comes out, and that will entirely
guarantee that no DBA will use one in production.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-29 16:58:51 | Re: strange buildfarm failures |
Previous Message | Lukas Kahwe Smith | 2007-04-29 16:30:22 | Re: Feature freeze progress report |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-29 17:07:46 | Re: Feature freeze progress report |
Previous Message | Lukas Kahwe Smith | 2007-04-29 16:30:22 | Re: Feature freeze progress report |