Josh Berkus wrote:
> One thing Peter forgot to mention here is that the next-to-last
> commitfest is the *last* commitfest for new major features. For the
> *last* commitfest, any patch introduced either has to be a
> resubmission of something we've seen at a prior CF, or has to be very
> "small" (i.e. not many lines/files, no side effects, no API or defined
> standard API).
> This makes the next-to-last CF our "biggest" CF.
I thought we discussed that at pgCon in May and rejected it.
I have very, very serious reservations about it. I think we need to get
better about proper triage, especially on the final commitfest, rather
than moving the effective feature freeze back a whole commitfest.
ISTM we're in danger of becoming dominated by procedures. Let's keep it
light and loose.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Stephen Frost||Date: 2009-07-01 02:57:50|
|Subject: Re: 8.5 development schedule|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-07-01 02:09:17|
|Subject: Re: 8.5 development schedule |