On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> darcy(at)druid(dot)net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> >>>> When is 7.1 being locked down? I may be releasing 3.1 with a few small
> >>>> fixes and changes very soon.
> >>
> >> You've probably got about 2 weeks before beta starts. Bug fixes are
> >> accepted during beta freeze, of course --- just no new-feature
> >> development.
>
> > how are we dealing with third party software like this though? Stuff like
> > PyGreSQL and PGAccess should be "at the authors discretion", no? As they
> > don't interfere with the core functionality and build of the system?
>
> Well, a third party author always has the option to release his code
> separately on whatever timeline seems good to him. But I think that for
> third-party code included in the distribution, the same standards ought
> to apply as for the Postgres code itself: we don't want people sticking
> alpha-quality code into a Postgres release tarball, whether it's core
> functionality or not. It's not as if "no new features for a month" is
> a particularly onerous standard to meet ;-)
agreed about the alpha quality, but if someone like D'Arcy or Constantin
releases a new version of their code, is there any reason to hold off on
bringing that in? Haven't we done that in the past with pgaccess as it
is? I seem to recall Bruce bringing in a new release of PgAccess close to
the release, but am not 100% certain of this ...