| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG 9.0 release timetable |
| Date: | 2010-05-31 15:08:35 |
| Message-ID: | 13070.1275318515@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, 31 May 2010, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
>>
>> My understanding was beta 2 would be out on 7th June. Is that changing?
> Yes, but Simon is correct in that 4-5 weeks between betas is a long time,
The reason it went like that is that (a) we had PGCon in there, and (b)
we had a set of security releases in there. Asking for another beta
to have happened is pointless. You might recall that I already *did*
ask that --- I wanted beta2 to happen concurrently with the security
releases --- and was turned down.
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is actually available.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shrish Purohit | 2010-05-31 15:09:18 | Index only scans |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-05-31 15:07:15 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |