Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: damage control mode

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-10 11:52:23
Message-ID: 1263124343.19367.139498.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sat, 2010-01-09 at 08:46 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:

> it seems much better to me to have the rule than not

I think we can overplay the need for lots of rules here and the need to
chase up status every 5 minutes.

The first problem, in previous years, was patches spent too long on the
patch queue. That is now solved, AFAICS, at least to my satisfaction. 

The second problem was spending >4 months on code consolidation at last
commitfest before we go to beta. We are unlikely to avoid that just by
saying "it will be two weeks"; trying to force it will cause arguments,
waste developer time and possibly endanger code quality. AFAICS we are
on track for a much improved situation than before and I'm personally
happy with that also.

Quality > Completeness > Timeliness, IMHO.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2010-01-10 12:12:36
Subject: Re: Congrats Alvaro!
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-01-10 11:34:56
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and triggering failover

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group