Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: damage control mode

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-08 18:34:27
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> > Robert Haas wrote:
>> >> > You can't move from commitfest to beta until all _known_ bugs are
>> >> > fixed/addressed, and you can't move from beta to RC using the same
>> >> > criteria.
>> >>
>> >> Hmm. ?For 8.4, I don't think we actually fixed "all" known bugs - I
>> >> think we made a decision about which ones had to be fixed and which
>> >> ones we were going to push off, and then did so.
>> >
>> > Right, we have to decide which ones get pushed to the TODO list, but
>> > also consider that several obvious bugs got into the 8.4.0 release,
>> > which is something we are going to try to avoid this time.
>> True.  It's worth being clear, though I'm sure we're on the same
>> wavelength here, that those bugs didn't come from the open items list.
>>  They came from stabilization issues related to large patches
>> committed in that release cycle.  That's why it seems to me that
>> pushing off some of the large patches that were not submitted until
>> the final CommitFest is likely to speed up the release.
> Yes, these were things that should have showed up in testing, but
> didn't.
>> We discussed doing this at the very beginning of 8.4 release cycle
>> and, the more I think about it, the more I think it's not fair not to
>> go ahead and do it.  Otherwise, we're rewarding people for ignoring a
>> guideline that was discussed, and punishing (1) the people who have
>> refrained from submitting large patches at the last minute, (2) people
>> who would like to see their already-committed patches released on a
>> reasonable time frame, and (3) people who don't want the tree to be
>> frozen for a near-eternity while we shake out all the bugs that these
>> large, last-minute patches introduce.  We're also increasing the
>> chances the the final release will contain undiscovered bugs, since
>> they will have had ONLY the beta period, and no part of the
>> development cycle, to shake out.
> Doing what?  Not including HS an SR in 8.5?

No.  Pushing off large patches that weren't submitted until the last
CommitFest to the next release.


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Kevin GrittnerDate: 2010-01-08 18:36:44
Subject: Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking
Previous:From: David E. WheelerDate: 2010-01-08 18:32:36
Subject: Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group