Re: Project scheduling issues (was Re: Per tuple overhead,

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> > Agreed on all accounts ... which is why this time, I want to do a proper
> > branch when beta starts ... hell, from what I've seen suggested here so
> > far, we have no choice ... At least then we can 'rip out' something from
> > the beta tree without having to remove and re-add it to the development
> > one later, hoping that they're changes haven't been affected by someone
> > else's ...
>
> Well, let's give that a try and see how it goes. I'm a bit worried
> about the amount of double-patching we'll have to do, but other projects
> seem to manage to cope with multiple active branches...

Yes, Marc has been advocating this, and perhaps it is time to give it a
try. There are some downsides:

o All committers need to know that they have to double-patch
o We might have developers working on new features rather than
focusing on beta testing/fixing.

One interesting idea would be to create a branch for 7.4, and apply
_only_ 7.4 patches to that branch. Then, when we release 7.3, we merge
that branch back into the main CVS tree. That would eliminate
double-patching _and_ give people a place to commit 7.4 changes. I
don't think the merge would be too difficult because 7.3 will not change
significantly during beta.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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