X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1129FB3E3 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 20:41:35 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 53804-03-8 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 20:40:43 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (server227.ethosmedia.com [209.128.84.227]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81D429F95CB for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2006 20:38:48 -0300 (ADT) X-EthosMedia-Virus-Scanned: no infections found Received: from [64.81.245.111] (account josh@agliodbs.com HELO [192.168.1.27]) by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 10054022; Fri, 01 Sep 2006 16:42:11 -0700 From: Josh Berkus Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com Organization: Aglio Database Solutions To: Bruce Momjian Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 16:39:41 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Tom Lane References: <200609012225.k81MPwJ02170@momjian.us> In-Reply-To: <200609012225.k81MPwJ02170@momjian.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200609011639.42280.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.063 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200609/80 X-Sequence-Number: 89609 Bruce, Tom, all: > No rejiggering is going to get people to complete things they didn't > complete under the old system. It'll help the new people. A lot of people -- if not most -- submitting their first major patch to PostgreSQL dramatically underestimate the amount of fix-up that's going to be required, and assume that there won't be a spec discussion, which there often is. By getting them to submit a little at a time, *earlier*, we can avoid doing those things at the last minute. Alternately, we can just make sure that first-time patchers have mentors who check progress well before feature freeze. > The plan you list above is what we did > for this release. No, it's not. There's a bunch of patches which we had nothing on -- not spec, not design draft, not anything -- until we got them on July 20th. Our current system is to have only one deadline, at which point you're expected to have 85% of the patch done and up to PostgreSQL standards. That's quite a bit of "jumping in with both feet" for a newbie. > I did try to get us additional help in reviewing. Neil was unavailable, > and Alvaro could only give part of his time Asking two people is not exactly an all-out effort to get reviewers. > It strikes me that setting feature freeze in midsummer might not be the > best strategy for having manpower available to review --- people tend to > be on vacation in August. Maybe the answer is just to move the dates a > bit one way or the other. We've discussed that issue before, yes. Since we're proposing a new roadmap process for 8.3, and will likely be dealing with a lot of major patches, maybe that's the release to delay? However, as PR maven I do want to point out that doing the final release in December would be a bad idea. Hard to get news coverage. Also, we'd have the same issue with people being gone. -- --Josh Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco