Re: [HACKERS] 7.0 status request

> Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> Here are the major open issues for 7.0 that I remember:
>
> > Is large tuple support not open at this time?
>
> I think Bruce was trying to list the work items that are both large
> and fairly likely to be done before 7.0. (I suspect his motivation
> is to figure out what changes he should allow for while writing his
> book...)

Actually, the motivation was to just get a heads-up from everyone that
we are on track for 7.0. If someone wanted to cancel their offer of
adding a feature, that is usually the way we hear about it. That way,
we don't find out just before beta that someone has decided to abandon a
feature addition.

This doesn't mean they will actually complete the addition, but it does
mean that at this time they are going to attempt to complete it for 7.0.

As we get closer, the dreaded Open Items list appears to marshall forces
to get as many bugs fixed/features as possible, though Tom, your
presence is making that unnecessary because you seem to fix the bugs
as soon as they come up. In the old days, the stuff stayed in my
mailbox, and nearing beta, I would comb through for open bug reports,
make a list, and try and get as many fixed as possible.

BTW, I am writing the book assuming no additions will be made for 7.0.
If they happen, I will rewrite. If I put a feature on paper, there is
extra pressure to complete it, and I don't want to do that.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026