From: Lukas Kahwe Smith <smith@pooteeweet.org>
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 09:30:22 -0700
Organization: Hub.Org Networking Services
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <4634C81E.3040100@pooteeweet.org>
References: <200704270313.l3R3DwF16449@momjian.us>
	<1177792836.3663.61.camel@silverbirch.site>
	<46348320.7080808@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<20070429154006.GA18593@alvh.no-ip.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
In-Reply-To: <20070429154006.GA18593@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Yeah; the agreement we had was that 8.3 would be a short release.  So if
> we're going to take too long to review and apply the outstanding patches
> we have, we should rather push them to 8.4, get 8.3 released quickly and
> then go on with the regular annual release.  The postponed patches can
> be reviewed and committed early in 8.4, instead of at the last minute in
> 8.3.  Sounds like a smarter, safer move.

Hmm, I do not have an overview on this, but like Alvaro mentions, the 
shorter release cycles for 8.3 was done because we felt that a number of 
patches that were originally slated for 8.2 were almost but not quite 
ready for 8.2. So are all of those patches from back then ready to go 
into 8.3? If not then it would indicate that fast tracking a release 
cycle for patches there are not quite there yet is not paying off?

Otherwise, if all/most of the patches originally planned for 8.2 have 
made it into 8.3, everything is good. If new additions are not yet ready 
then they will just get bumped to 8.4, just like the changes that got 
bumped to 8.3.

regards,
Lukas