| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.1 Beta |
| Date: | 2011-03-26 01:50:56 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimJ6rP_kJr_7VhfKDPMM60WA+qZo2+SeSQiQ3cB@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The correct question is whether we're ready for beta, and I would say
> the answer is clearly no, unless you have a pretty low standard for what
> "ready for beta" means. Perhaps it would be suitable to discuss what
> the standard for that really ought to be; but I don't agree in the
> slightest that we ought to decide based on predetermined calendar dates
> rather than the state of the code.
Agreed. I think some discussion of which of the things on the open
item lists need to be done before beta might be helpful, and we ought
to add any items that are not there but are blockers.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-26 02:45:13 | Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-03-26 01:48:41 | Re: 9.1 Beta |