Re: 8.5 development schedule

Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
>> Yeah. In core's private discussion of this, I too was arguing for
>> running a CommitFest ASAP, in order to have some motion on the existing
>> patch backlog. I don't know that we'd actually end up committing many,
>> but we need to provide feedback so people can take the next steps.

> I'm in agreement that we should try to provide feedback (in general, to
> be honest) on patches/suggestions/ideas/designs/etc as quickly as
> possible. The commitfest approach is good for this when it's "in
> motion", but it's been stale for months. +1 from me for starting early.

> To flip it around a bit, I don't know that there's actually a moratorium
> on providing feedback?

Well, I wouldn't put it as strongly as "moratorium", but ... the point
of having a release cycle is that at certain times people are supposed
to focus on stabilizing and testing a release, not on working on new
development. If, at any time in the past six months, I were to have
gone off and reviewed a patch that's clearly 8.5 material, that's
man-hours taken directly away from getting a solid 8.4 release out the
door. Which means that much longer until 8.4 does get out, which hurts
everybody including the submitter of the premature patch. So in general
I agree with the viewpoint Peter outlined that working on new
development during beta period is not really playing by the rules, and
that people who expect feedback for new development during beta period
simply don't understand how the project is supposed to work.

If you find yourself with nothing else to do except review a new patch
during beta, then sure, go do it. But is there *really* nothing you
could be doing to help expedite the beta?

Anyway, as of now that's all moot until next spring. But it's still
true that people want time to work on their own patches, which is why
we came up with the commitfests. It's so you can get some time to work
without feeling guilty about not reviewing other people's work instead.

regards, tom lane