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

Re: 8.4 release planning

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: 8.4 release planning
Date: 2009-01-29 03:32:42
Message-ID: 200901282232.43033.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 20:12:40 Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Robert Treat wrote:
> > The revisionism was that of "remarkable failure".  That was our shortest
> > release cycle in the modern era. And it didn't have the advantage of the
> > commitfest process.
> >
> > But I think what is important here is to recognize why it didn't work.
> > Once again we ended up with large, complex features (HOT, tsearch) that
> > people didn't want to wait 14 months to see if they missed the 8.3
> > release. And yes, most of these same arguements were raised then... "full
> > text search is killer feature", "whole applications are waiting for
> > in-core full text search", "hot will give allow existing customers to use
> > postgres on a whole new level", "not fair to push back patches so long
> > when developers followed the rules", "sponsors wont want to pay for
> > features they wont see for years", "developers dont want to wait so long
> > to see features committed", and on and on...
>
> I think the big reminder for me from above is that we will always have
> big stuff that doesn't make a certain major release, and trying to
> circumvent our existing process is usually a mistake.
>

Our usual process *is* to try and circumvent our usual process. And I believe 
it will continue to be that way until we lower the incentive to lobby for 
circumvention. 

-- 
Robert Treat
Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net
Consulting: http://www.omniti.com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-01-29 03:35:22
Subject: Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable
Previous:From: Fujii MasaoDate: 2009-01-29 03:18:12
Subject: Re: Hot standby, recovery infra

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