Re: Release cycle length

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Release cycle length
Date: 2003-11-20 20:19:38
Message-ID: 6400.1069359578@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-www

Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> The time from release 7.3 to release 7.4 was 355 days, an all-time high.
>> We really need to shorten that.

> I don't see much of a point for a shorter release cycle as long as we
> don't get rid of the initdb requirement for releases that don't change
> the system catalog structure. All we gain from that is spreading out the
> number of different versions used in production.

Yeah, I think the main issue in all this is that for real production
sites, upgrading Postgres across major releases is *painful*. We have
to find a solution to that before it makes sense to speed up the
major-release cycle.

By the same token, I'm not sure that there's much of a market for
"development" releases --- people who find a 7.3->7.4 upgrade painful
aren't going to want to add additional upgrades to incompatible
intermediate states. If we could fix that, there'd be more interest.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2003-11-20 20:26:40 Re: 4 Clause license?
Previous Message Larry Rosenman 2003-11-20 20:17:34 Re: 4 Clause license?

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2003-11-20 20:33:15 Re: Release cycle length
Previous Message Archeron 2003-11-20 19:34:09 developer site.