| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Date: | 2009-01-28 02:41:52 |
| Message-ID: | 497FC5F0.3020208@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heh. The reason we wanted a short 8.3 cycle was so we could push out
> patches that had been held over from 8.2. We are going to have exactly
> no credibility if we tell Simon et al "we're pushing these patches to
> 8.5, but don't worry, it'll be a short release cycle".
>
> I think the best thing we could do overall is to set release dates and
> stick to them.
On the other hand, we might be better throwing out release dates
and releasing at the end of any Commit Fest where there is enough
demand/interest.
Then we could release 8.4 now, with few objections since people would
know that if Hot Standby has enough demand it could be released within one
commitfest of it being in good shape. Likewise the SE* guys would be
aware that if they want that patch to drive a release, they'd need to
round up more visible demand.
Heck, 8.4 could have been released a whole commitfest ago if enough
people think FSM is the killer feature in that one.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-01-28 02:55:52 | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira de Oliveira | 2009-01-28 02:38:15 | Re: log_duration_sample config option patch |