X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Received: from hub.org (unknown [64.117.224.146])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 3242B475ADE; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:19:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [64.117.224.146] (unknown [64.117.224.146])
	by hub.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 93C7F1038BE2; Tue, 11 Mar 2003 21:19:57 -0400 (AST)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 21:19:56 -0400 (AST)
From: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign 
In-Reply-To: <19173.1047323837@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Message-ID: <20030311211844.P72192@hub.org>
References: <19041.1047322279@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3E6CE1F2.8030302@postgresql.org>
	<19173.1047323837@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200303/448
X-Sequence-Number: 36694

On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, Tom Lane wrote:

> Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org> writes:
> > The scenario that's appealing to me the most is this for the next release:
> > PostgreSQL 8.0
> > + Includes PITR and the Win32 port
>
> If the folks doing those things can get done in time, great.  I'm even
> willing to push out the release schedule (now, not later) to make it
> more likely they can get done.  What I'm not willing to do is define
> the release in terms of "it happens when these things are done".  We
> learned the folly of that approach in 7.1 and 7.2.  Setting a target
> date and sticking to it works *much* better.

The thing is, IMHO, everyone knew the release scheduale for v7.4, so if
they aren't ready now, I can't really see justifying pushing things back
in hopes that they will be ready then ...