Re: Per tuple overhead, cmin, cmax, OID

On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > > > Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at> writes:
> > > > > No comment on a planned 7.3 timeframe? :-(
> > > >
> > > > I think we are planning to go beta in late summer (end of August, say).
> > > > Probably in July we'll start pressing people to finish up any major
> > > > development items, or admit that they won't happen for 7.3. So we've
> > > > still got a couple months of full-tilt development mode before we
> > > > start to worry about tightening up for release.
> > >
> > > I am concerned about slowing down too early. We did that in previous
> > > releases and didn't get the beta focus we needed, and it was too
> > > paralyzing on people to know what is to be slowed and what to keep
> > > going. I think a slowdown two weeks before beta would be fine.
> >
> > Other then personal slow downs, there is no reason for anything to "slow
> > down" until beta itself starts ...
>
> I assume Tom doesn't want a huge patch applied the day before beta, and

No offence to Tom, but who cares whether Tom wants a huge patch or not?

> I can understand that, but patch problems usually appear within two
> weeks of application, so I think we only have to worry about those last
> two weeks. Of course, another option is to continue in full development
> until the end of August, then start beta in September as soon as the
> code is stable.

That kinda was the plan ... code will be frozen around the 1st of
September, with a release packaged then that will be label'd beta1 ...
regardless of how stable it is ... beta is "we're not taking any more
changes except fixes, so pound on this and let us know what needs to be
fixed" ... there shouldn't be any 'lead up' to beta, the lead up is the
development period itself ... *shrug*