From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: It's June 1; do you know where your release is? |
Date: | 2009-06-02 03:50:06 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f070906012050p6ccd62d3v13d3e0f887fe7c90@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> As of today we are three months behind the original plan for 8.4.0 release.
> In a one-year release cycle that's already pretty bad slip; but there now
> seems no chance of a release happening in less than a month, and if we
> continue to let things drift it could easily stretch to five or six
> months' slip. Given the slow pace of bug reports there is no reason to
> be waiting. We need to refocus our energy on getting the release out.
>
> The main thing that needs to happen now is to deal with the open items
> listed at
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_8.4_Open_Items
> either by fixing them or by agreeing that it's okay to let them slide
> to 8.5 or beyond.
Regarding this item:
* Consider reverting preventing regular users from base type creation
You raise this point:
tgl says: whether or not we think PL/Java is bulletproof, there are
other problems, for instance this one
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/87zlnwnvjg.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk
That's a pretty overwhelming argument for leaving it as-is. I think
we should remove this from the list of open items.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeremy Kerr | 2009-06-02 03:52:33 | [RFC,PATCH] Only disable sigpipe during SSL write |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-06-02 03:46:39 | Re: from_collapse_limit vs. geqo_threshold |