Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> If we decide to fold CF3 and CF4 together, either we lose that step
>> (which would make me sad, it seems like a good idea) or we need to
>> figure another way to work it into the process.
> Well, we should have the triage discussion ASAP then. We were really
> supposed to have it a week ago.
Well, I don't want to just say "hey, it's triage time!" while we're
still actively working on the CF. Personally, the reason I've
accomplished nothing since early December on CF3 is lack of bandwidth
--- bug fixing, email-answering, and non-PG Red Hat work have consumed
all my time that wasn't eaten by holiday distractions. I'm hoping to
get something done soon towards committing immediately-committable CF
entries, but if we're instead focusing on patches that require triage
discussions, that's likely to not happen.
Looking back at the original schedule agreement, I see I misremembered
it a bit; we actually had the idea for two rounds of which-patches-have-
CF1: June 15 - July 15
CF2: Sept 15 - Oct 15
CF3: Nov 15 - Dec 15 Planning Week - Dec 8-15
CF4.1: Jan 15 - Feb 15 Final Triage: Feb 1-7
but both of those discussion weeks were mid-CF, and I now think that
that's got little chance of working because of bandwidth considerations.
We certainly totally forgot about the first one.
I think a realistic answer might be to admit that we've slipped quite a
bit. Set the end date of CF3 to perhaps end of January, do triage the
first week of February, and then start CF4 after that, about three or
four weeks later than planned.
regards, tom lane
In response to
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-16 19:55:15 from Josh Berkus
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-16 20:45:46 from Bruce Momjian
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 05:01:26 from Peter Eisentraut
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2013-01-16 20:45:46|
|Subject: Re: CF3+4|
|Previous:||From: Stephen Frost||Date: 2013-01-16 20:12:08|
|Subject: Re: [PATCH] COPY .. COMPRESSED|