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

Re: damage control mode

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-10 12:53:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Robert Treat
<xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> wrote:
> But really if beta slips because we don't like the looks of our open issues
> list, thats signicantly better than the last couple releases where we held
> everything up just to get things into CVS months after feature freeze had
> passed us by.

Yes.  It seems that we're at least not going to let the final
CommitFest drag on and on and on this time, which seems like a
positive step.  But will it help enough to make everyone feel
satisfied with the results?  That's less clear.


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-01-10 12:55:09
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-10 12:44:17
Subject: Re: win32 socket definition

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group