| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Feature Freeze date for 8.4 |
| Date: | 2007-10-24 01:34:04 |
| Message-ID: | 471EA10C.9080101@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Now to the extent that regular commit-fests keep patch development
> more closely aligned with the mainline CVS, the fest proposal might
> indirectly alleviate your pain. But I'd think that snaps taken
> *after* the fests would be the best for that, as they'd be closer
> to what any subsequent development would be based on. The stability
> argument I made doesn't seem like a problem for testing purposes,
> only if someone were to try to use such a snap for production purposes
> (which putting them up for archiving might encourage).
>
>
>
It might be worth applying a simple tag (but not a branch) at the end
(and maybe also at the start) of each checkpoint/fest/whatever
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-24 01:55:40 | Re: Feature Freeze date for 8.4 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-10-24 00:25:43 | Re: Feature Freeze date for 8.4 |