| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Getting to beta1 |
| Date: | 2010-03-16 00:40:49 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f071003151740t60b8d1d4q1c2ce9ab77585127@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> We can easily create another alpha by April 3. I think the big question
> is whether we can put out beta1 while we still have open HS/SR issues.
> My guess is no. My other guess is that we will still have open HS/SR
> issues on April 3. So, putting those two guesses together, we will
> create a new alpha by April 3 for you. :-|
I think we need to do a better job defining exactly what we think the
"must fix" HS/SR issues are. Otherwise I can see this process of
trying to get to beta dragging out almost indefinitely.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-03-16 00:46:47 | Re: Ragged latency log data in multi-threaded pgbench |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-03-15 23:50:17 | Should we throw error when converting a nonexistent/ambiguous timestamp? |