From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <200303120350.h2C3olZ14727@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
In-Reply-To: <20030311212030.S72192@hub.org>
To: "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 22:50:47 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Justin Clift <justin@postgresql.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > So, what should we do?  Should we go another month or two and just wait
> > until we have enough must-have features?  While not waiting on specific
> > features, it _is_ waiting for something to warrant a release.  I guess
> > the big question is whether we release on a scheduled-basis or a
> > enough-features-basis.
> 
> Schedualed basis ... if we released on an 'enough features basis', I could
> see alot longer then 6 mos between releases happening very quickly ... we
> have enough problems staying within the scheduale as it is, let alot
> moving it to a 'sliding scale' ...

I guess the big question is that if we can't get enough big features in
6 months, do we still stay on the 6 month schedule?  I know Tom said
folks don't have to upgrade --- that is true, but our releases do seem a
little lighter lately.

Six months would be June 1 beta, so maybe that is still a good target. 
I agree we should not hold up beta for any feature.  So maybe the plan
is June 1 beta, and we don't care if we have enough big features or not
--- does that sound good to everyone?  Or should we be looking at May 1
as Tom originally suggested?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073