| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-05-09 21:26:18 |
| Message-ID: | 5731007A.5040700@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On 05/09/2016 02:00 PM, Josh berkus wrote:
> On 05/09/2016 01:58 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>> So this is probably just highlighting how I'm not up to date on the
>> -advocacy discussion :) But I thought the idea was to have it
>> integrated, and that *that* was "the product" in this case. As in the
>> "breaker that makes it possible to do transparent upgrades without
>> external products". Which I thought was the target for next release, not
>> this release. But I may be confusing multiple discussion, and as such
>> contributing to the confusion.
>
> Yeah, there's multiple discussions, at least 2:
>
> 1. Should we promote pglogical in the beta as something to *test*?
>
I believe I mentioned in the past that I do think it is a reasonable
idea to promote it. The question is with what message.
> 2. Is pglogical a major-version-making feature?
Not if it isn't in core.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Darren Duncan | 2016-05-09 22:18:19 | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Previous Message | Gilberto Castillo | 2016-05-09 21:16:44 | Re: [MASSMAIL]Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |