Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> So I suggest (my choices are of course subjective):
>> Dividing
>> win32 'should fix' (installer, /contrib, etc.)
>> win32 'must fix' (psql query cancel, <1970 dates, non-cygwin regression)

> actually, IMHO, some of these should be classified as bug fixes, assuming
> that the patches are already in the source tree, and don't affect the
> feature freeze in any way, only the release ...

The issue is really whether the "bug fixes" are major enough to
invalidate any previous beta testing. For example, it would be
unreasonable to go beta with the "<1970 dates" issue unresolved, because
what we are talking about doing to fix that involves plopping in a
pretty big chunk of new (to us anyway) code. And since we plan to use
that code on all platforms, it needs beta testing everywhere. Another
example is the sync/fsync changes we are talking about making --- that's
pretty basic and it'll need QA on all platforms not just win32.

It would be reasonable to go beta with open minor issues that we
expect to be fixable by localized patches. (But on the other hand,
why wouldn't such issues be resolved before then?)

So I'm not sure that "should fix vs must fix" is the appropriate
classification. "Small/localized fix vs nontrivial change"
is more what I'm worried about.

regards, tom lane