| From: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Two weeks to feature freeze |
| Date: | 2003-06-19 10:12:36 |
| Message-ID: | 35631.199.90.235.43.1056031956.squirrel@www.dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Maybe a better strategy would be to get a release out soon but not wait 6
months for another release which would contain the Win32 port and the PITR
stuff (assuming those aren't done in time for this release).
Just a thought.
andrew
Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
>> Well, I suppose that history has shown that waiting on specific
>> features causes trouble with postgresql development, but I don't see
>> why a release can't be based around waiting for feature x as long as
>> feature x is being actively worked on by trusted developers who have
>> an endgame in sight.
>
> We have been led down that garden path before, and it's been a losing
> proposition every time.
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-06-19 10:17:20 | Re: pg_get_triggerdef in pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Andreas Pflug | 2003-06-19 08:49:39 | Re: allowed user/db variables |