Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, 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 22:52:51
Message-ID: CA+TgmoY=+HaO+21Ost5oWR2mR32vEDak8rVguzkMP6SD3pjxgQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> 1. Should we promote pglogical in the beta as something to *test*?

No. But the reason depends on the answer to this question: Is
pglogical a core submission or a third-party product?

If it's the former, then getting people to test such things is the
purpose of a CommitFest, not a beta announcement, and in fact it did
get tested and reviewed as part of the CommitFest just like many other
patches which were also submitted, except that it got more enthusiasm
than many until it became clear that no updates in response to review
comments would be forthcoming.

If it's the latter, then we don't promote third-party products in beta
announcements; 2ndQuadrant can make their own announcements about
pglogical in accordance with
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/NewsEventsApproval just like anyone
else.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh berkus 2016-05-09 22:53:37 Re: Beta1 announcement: alpha1 draft
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-05-09 22:46:20 Re: 9.6 -> 10.0