Re: Two weeks to feature freeze

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: "Nigel J(dot) Andrews" <nandrews(at)investsystems(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Two weeks to feature freeze
Date: 2003-06-20 14:25:51
Message-ID: 1056119151.7086.2263.camel@camel
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 04:41, Nigel J. Andrews wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Maybe a better strategy would be to get a release out soon but not wait
> > > 6 months for another release which would contain the Win32 port and the
> > > PITR stuff (assuming those aren't done in time for this release).
> > >
> > > Just a thought.
> >
> > And definitely in agreement here ... I'd rather see a shortened dev cycle
> > prompted by a big feature being added, then delaying a release because "oh
> > oh, I need another few weeks" that draws out when something unexpected
> > happens :(
> >
> >...
>
> I'm not sure why another delay is being considered. There's been a delay of
> a week because of the server problems hasn't there and wasn't the original
> delay only acceptable on the basis that that was that and there wasn't going to
> be another extension?
>

There really isn't for this release. Any talk of delay is just a thought
on general policy for future releases.

Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Jacobs 2003-06-20 14:29:43 Re: PlPython
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-06-20 14:14:58 Re: [HACKERS] Subtraction carry bug in xlog.c in 7.3 and 7.4