Re: commit fests

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: commit fests
Date: 2010-01-23 00:50:50
Message-ID: 26071.1264207850@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On fre, 2010-01-22 at 18:05 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Any ideas?

> The lower bound on the release cycle is about 12 months right now
> because we intend to support old versions for 5 years, and 5 or 6
> branches at once is about the most anyone can handle. That formula is
> tough to change.

Another problem is that it's very debatable whether users (as opposed
to developers) want a fast release cycle. Some of that reluctance to
update might dissipate if we had a better upgrade-in-place story, but
by no means all of it. People don't want to have to retest their
applications every six months.

I agree with trying to cut down the submission-to-commit delay, but
the release cycle length is not primarily determined by what patch
authors would like ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Mielke 2010-01-23 00:54:16 Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0, Postgres vs. PostgreSQL
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-01-23 00:26:31 Re: commit fests