> Now the other approach we could take is that we'll ship *something*
> on 7 Mar, even if it's less stable than what we've traditionally
> considered to be beta quality.  I don't think that really helps
> much though; it just means we need more time in beta.

Well, we're shipping an alpha, aren't we?

My proposal for "beta in 2 weeks" was based on the idea of having *no*
new patches in CF4, at all.  Given the reality of HS+SR, I don't think
it's realistic anymore either.

--Josh Berkus

In response to

• Re: damage control mode at 2010-01-10 06:38:07 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: damage control mode at 2010-01-11 03:13:32 from Robert Haas

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Josh Berkus	Date: 2010-01-10 23:27:53
	Subject: Re: Typed tables
Previous:	From: Andrew Dunstan	Date: 2010-01-10 23:18:23
	Subject: Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]