Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?
Date: 2012-01-17 20:27:41
Message-ID: 1326832061.2820.14.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On mån, 2012-01-16 at 22:00 -0500, Greg Smith wrote:
> Adjusting that expectation is another side to pragmatism based on
> recent history I think needs to be acknowledged, but is unlikely to be
> improved on. 9.0 shipped on September 20. 9.1 shipped on September
> 11. If we say the last CF of each release is unlikely to wrap up
> before early March each year, that's 6 months of "settling" time
> between major feature freeze and release. So far that seems to result
> in stable releases to be proud of, on a predictable enough yearly
> schedule.

Well, has it? I think, it took until version 9.1.2 to have a release
without major issues that you could consider for production. So do we
need 8 or 10 months of settling time? Or should we release earlier,
realizing that we won't get proper testing before the final release
anyway? I don't know.

Another concern is that we are now essentially freezing 9.2 features
with at best about four weeks of production experience and feedback from
9.1. I expect that this will also contribute to dragging out the
finalization of 9.2 once more.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2012-01-17 20:39:23 Re: PATCH: tracking temp files in pg_stat_database
Previous Message Dan Scales 2012-01-17 20:25:41 Re: [WIP] Double-write with Fast Checksums