| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Date: | 2009-01-26 15:35:02 |
| Message-ID: | 874ozmjd21.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I fail to see how rejecting unreviewed patches provides benefit for
> users, developers or sponsors.
Nobody has suggested rejecting either sync replication or standby database.
The debate here is over whether to commit into 8.4 or into 8.5.
Put another way, the choice here is whether to have a half-baked delayed 8.4
release in 6 months or a polished on-time 8.5 release in 12 months. Either way
the feature ships and on a not terribly different timeline either.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2009-01-26 15:40:12 | Re: problem with archive_command as suggested by documentation |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-01-26 15:30:48 | Re: 8.4 release planning (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules) |