Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 15:46:16 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
 pgsql-core <pgsql-core@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [CORE] postpone next week's release
Message-ID: <20150529194616.GL26667@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: 
 <CA+TgmoY-OUbRAqZ7Rgdwb-_CTBbY=fkR93sgPrJaFfR8oojeCw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150529185431.GG26667@tamriel.snowman.net>
 <CABUevExb+p3OGFBAMTc2s0tuuygkmnca_BV6Qe0hACvRmgyb1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <26984.1432927977@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CABUevEw6LKsJh+MnWZgg5yQJkM7buW6ghEA0au6hhRgZ-uWsQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <27262.1432928581@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lam14D/9fXh0ej1L"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <27262.1432928581@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


--lam14D/9fXh0ej1L
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

* Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> >> I think there's no way that we wait more than one additional week to p=
ush
> >> the fsync fix.  So the problem is not with scheduling the update relea=
ses,
> >> it's with whether we can also fit in a 9.5 beta release before PGCon.
>=20
> > I think 9.5 beta has to stand back. The question is what we do with the
> > potentially two minor releases. Then we can slot in the beta whenever.
>=20
> > If we do the minor as currently planned, can we do another one the week
> > after to deal with the multixact issues? (scheduling wise we're going to
> > have to do one the week after *regardless*, the question is if we can m=
ake
> > two different ones, or if we need to fold them into one)
>=20
> I suppose we could, but it doubles the amount of release gruntwork
> involved, and it doesn't exactly make us look good to our users either.

Agreed.  Makes it look like we can't manage to figure out our bugs and
put fixes for them together in sensible releases..

	Thanks!

		Stephen

--lam14D/9fXh0ej1L
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=95OV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--lam14D/9fXh0ej1L--