| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PG 9.0 release timetable |
| Date: | 2010-05-31 15:48:24 |
| Message-ID: | 13820.1275320904@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
>> according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
>> packaging manpower is actually available.
> How many beta testers out there *rely* on a package to do their testing?
A lot of them --- probably approximately 100% of the Windows population,
for example. People who are capable of working from source are likely
not waiting for beta packages anyway, just using CVS or nightly
snapshots.
> I'm not saying don't try and get packages in place, I'm just saying it
> shouldn't be a requirement to stamp code BETA and create a tar ball ...
There's more work that goes into a beta release than just stamping,
as you should know as well as anyone. Otherwise we might as well call
the nightly snapshots beta releases.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-31 15:52:07 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-05-31 15:47:26 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |