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

Re: branching for 9.2devel

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: branching for 9.2devel
Date: 2011-04-25 14:45:04
Message-ID: 13335.1303742704@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> The recent and wide-ranging "formatting curmudgeons" thread included
> suggestions by Tom and myself that we should consider branching the
> tree immediately after beta1.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg01157.php
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-04/msg01162.php
> This didn't get much commentary, but others have expressed support for
> similar ideas in the past, so perhaps we should do it?  Comments?

One small issue that would have to be resolved before branching is
whether and when to do a "final" pgindent run for 9.1.  Seems like the
alternatives would be:
	1. Don't do anything more, be happy with the one run done already.
	2. Do another run just before branching.
	3. Make concurrent runs against HEAD and 9.1 branch sometime later.
I don't much care for #3 because it would also affect whatever
developmental work had been done to that point, and thus have a
considerable likelihood of causing merge problems for WIP patches.
Not sure if enough has happened to really require #2.

But a much more significant issue is that I don't see a lot of point in
branching until we are actually ready to start active 9.2 development.
So unless you see this as a vehicle whereby committers get to start
hacking 9.2 but nobody else does, there's no point in cutting a branch
until shortly before a CommitFest opens.  I'm not aware that we've set
any dates for 9.2 CommitFests yet ...

> The other major issue discussed on the thread was as to how frequent
> and how long CommitFests should be.  I don't think we really came to a
> consensus on that one.

Yeah, it did not seem like there was enough evidence to justify a
change, and Greg's comments were discouraging.  (Though you've run more
fests than he has, so I was surprised that you weren't arguing
similarly.)  Should we consider scheduling one short-cycle fest during
9.2, just to see whether it works?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2011-04-25 14:50:42
Subject: Re: "stored procedures"
Previous:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2011-04-25 14:37:28
Subject: Re: branching for 9.2devel

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