| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Release cycle length |
| Date: | 2003-11-18 01:48:11 |
| Message-ID: | 3FB97A5B.5010102@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
> Everyone on -hackers should have been aware of it, as its always
> discussed at the end of the previous release cycle ... and I don't think
> we've hit a release cycle yet that has actually stayed in the 4 month
> period :( Someone is always 'just sitting on something that is almost
> done' at the end that pushes it further then originally planned ...
I think that the core just need to be tough on it, that's all.
If we have pre-published target dates, then everyone knows if they can
get their code in or not for that date.
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Larry Rosenman | 2003-11-18 01:52:52 | Re: help! |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-11-18 01:46:06 | Re: Release cycle length |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2003-11-18 01:58:20 | Re: Release cycle length |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-11-18 01:46:06 | Re: Release cycle length |