X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C926D1B537; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:43:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 75077-08; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:42:42 -0400 (AST) Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (server228.ethosmedia.com [209.128.84.228]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5964D1B536; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:42:40 -0400 (AST) Received: from [63.195.55.98] (HELO spooky) by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0.2) with ESMTP id 3939511; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:43:26 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Josh Berkus Organization: Aglio Database Solutions To: "Marc G. Fournier" , Neil Conway Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Release cycle length Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:42:31 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, PostgreSQL Development References: <87smkmgyn7.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com> <20031117233828.Y731@ganymede.hub.org> In-Reply-To: <20031117233828.Y731@ganymede.hub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200311180942.31093.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200311/316 X-Sequence-Number: 2963 Guys, I agree with Neil ... it's not the length of the development part of the cycle, it's the length of the beta testing. I do think an online bug tracker (bugzilla or whatever) would help. I also think that having a person in charge of "testing" would help as well ... no biggie, just someone whose duty it is to e-mail people in the community and ask about the results of testing, especially on the more obscure ports. I think a few e-mail reminders would do a *lot* to speed things up. But I'm not volunteering for this job; managing the release PR is "herding cats" enough! I also contributed to the delays on this release because it took longer than I expected to get the "PR machinery" started. We have a sort of system now, though, and the next release should be easier. HOWEVER, a release cycle of *less than 6 months* would kill the advocacy vols if we wanted the same level of publicity. I do support the idea of "dev" releases. For example, if there was a "dev" release of PG+ARC as soon as Jan is done with it, I have one client would would be willing to test it against a simulated production load on pretty heavy-duty hardware. (Oddly enough, my problem in doing more testing myself is external to PostgreSQL; most of our apps are PHP apps and you can't compile PHP against two different versions of PostgreSQL on the same server. Maybe with User Mode Linux I'll be able to do more testing now.) -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco