| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-03-22 17:52:26 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_Xyygdfg=YZNxTPU1MMcrtZRxDZh-F5kBkm1zbi0PyDQg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Josh berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> It's important to remember that PR strategy and engineering truth have
> only a passing acquaintance. While we don't want to promote vaporware,
> we do sometimes soft-pedal our own features to our project's detriment.
> In the current atomosphere of VC-funded hype, we'd do a bit better to
> trumpet our accomplishements early and often.
I see what you mean.
The question must be asked: What feature *would* meet that "major
version bump" standard? If it's not extensive parallelism, then I
don't know what else it could be.
--
Regards,
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2016-03-22 18:01:31 | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
| Previous Message | Josh berkus | 2016-03-22 17:41:42 | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |