| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Date: | 2009-01-28 02:07:48 |
| Message-ID: | 5506.1233108468@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> The more I think about it, the more I feel that where we failed for 8.3 was
> not having a short 8.4 cycle lined up, which would give more freedom to bump
> patches to the next release.
Heh. The reason we wanted a short 8.3 cycle was so we could push out
patches that had been held over from 8.2. We are going to have exactly
no credibility if we tell Simon et al "we're pushing these patches to
8.5, but don't worry, it'll be a short release cycle".
I think the best thing we could do overall is to set release dates and
stick to them. If your patch is not ready, well, at least it will get
out in a defined amount of time. Right now, the *real* problem with it
being pushed to the next release is you don't know how successful some
other guy will be at persuading us to delay the next release.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2009-01-28 02:16:00 | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Previous Message | Chad Sellers | 2009-01-28 01:59:45 | Re: 8.4 release planning |