Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 13:00:26 -0400
From: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>,
 Geoff Winkless <pgsqladmin@geoff.dj>,
 Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [CORE] Restore-reliability mode
Message-ID: <20150608170026.GU26667@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: 
 <CAEzk6fc6YiyRNMTHnam6ishGSFScvMNk-=ytFdYsceRcw3bV9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH7T-apL5ddcj3Qu=3hH3ObJUPKpHG7c2Rr_ndDV4HNoYRSbcg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEzk6ffGP5ZyCj7QsnT4y5JAYr+b37L6STpQM_2sRd9DnWkp1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMkU=1wusmcyQkx=SAANz9S8PQu=MsD6T+QNxMvNsPm0UtgSjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150608055950.4435a734@engels>
 <CAEzk6fc-B9Hen_65w1KOYRPuN7r_NxZmhi9E6Z85YgQ0g4foZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoYLpagRhvDEwN57FNrbFHo=VRikJLr+s-ajuhbUfs190Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEzk6ffspLDFuQJLaB8exoC9wGVOTYie8xy3As7HoGE6PYA96w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGTBQpbxxr==+LB9FntOEx59KfWR7B8qTRDeyYyyNw574dqt+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFQuwYg5-kKVvibUK4gLeKyWn370FoPYJ7Z=Za=iu+a-9VXOw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PfIhlGDRz6TxzAIB"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKFQuwYg5-kKVvibUK4gLeKyWn370FoPYJ7Z=Za=iu+a-9VXOw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org


--PfIhlGDRz6TxzAIB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

David,

* David G. Johnston (david.g.johnston@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Just *when* is git ready for testing? You don't know from the outside.
> >
> > I do lurk here a lot and still am unsure quite often.
> >
> > Even simply releasing an alpha *tarball* would be useful enough. What
> > is needed is the signal to test, rather than a fully-built package.
> >
> >
> IIUC the master branch is always ready for testing.
>=20
> I do not think the project cares whether everyone is testing the exact
> same codebase; as long as test findings include the relevant commit hash
> the results will be informative.

For my 2c, I do believe it's useful for projects which are based on PG
or which work with PG to have a 'alpha1' tag to refer to.  Asking users
to test with git hash XYZABC isn't great.  Getting more users of
applications which use PG to do testing is, in my view at least, a great
way to improve our test coverage and I do think having an alpha will
help with that.

That said, I'm not pushing to have one released this week or before
PGCon or any such- let's get the back-branch releases dealt with and
then we can get an alpha out.

	Thanks!

		Stephen

--PfIhlGDRz6TxzAIB
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=mq1C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--PfIhlGDRz6TxzAIB--