| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Release cycle length |
| Date: | 2003-11-18 03:00:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20031117225949.L731@ganymede.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > Right now, I believe we are looking at an April 1st beta, and a May 1st
> > related ... those are, as always, *tentative* dates that will become more
> > fine-tuned as those dates become nearer ...
>
> OK, here start the problems. Development already started, so April 1st is
> already 5 months development. Add 1 month because no one is willing to
> hold people to these dates. So that's 6 months. Then for 6 months of
> development, you need at least 2 months of beta. So we're already in the
> middle of July, everyone is on vacation, and we'll easily reach the 9
> months -- instead of 6.
'K, Sept 1st it is then ... sounds reasonable to me :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-11-18 03:02:44 | Re: logical column position |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2003-11-18 02:49:28 | Re: Release cycle length |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2003-11-18 03:10:20 | Re: Release cycle length |
| Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2003-11-18 02:49:28 | Re: Release cycle length |