Message-ID: <4635A3D8.5050108@kaltenbrunner.cc>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:07:52 +0200
From: Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc>
User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070307)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
CC: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>,
	Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
References: <200704270313.l3R3DwF16449@momjian.us>
	<1177792836.3663.61.camel@silverbirch.site>
	<46349EF4.2010304@enterprisedb.com>
	<4634EC25.6010104@postgresql.org>
	<4634F25C.3070403@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<4634FCFF.5040806@postgresql.org>
	<46358620.5080808@kaltenbrunner.cc>
	<46359E41.3030409@postgresql.org>
In-Reply-To: <46359E41.3030409@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dave Page wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> Interesting ... so if you have a new feature (or a number of them) -
>> that is not directly depending on some sort of new backend feature - i=
n
>> pgadmin you "delay" it until the next postgresql mjor release ?
>=20
> It's not so much that we delay the new features, it's just that we
> follow the same development schedule, just with a shorter beta/feature
> freeze period. We try to release just before PostgreSQL to avoid our
> respective advocacy efforts trampling each other - but that's usually a=

> bit of a guessing game in itself!

ah ok - makes sense

>=20
>> To be honest I personally have not used pgadmin in years and I have no=

>> idea what SQL-Server would be with or without Enterprise Manager so I
>> actually don't really know enough to further speculate on this ...
>=20
> I imagine the %age of SQL Server users that *don't* use Enterprise
> Manager is close to zero. It's a platform on which everything is
> expected to be a GUI.

I will take your word on that - I=E4m neither a Windows nor a MSSQL Serve=
r=20
user :-)

>=20
>>> Who's to say it will? Changes to pg_database have required a new rele=
ase
>>> in the past.
>> hmm true - but I imagine that a change to a catalog like pg_database i=
s
>> not the kind of feature you need to rush lot's of code in (again
>> speculating here) ?
>=20
> No, but it's exactly the reason why we release with/just before
> PostgreSQL. If we were offset by six months, we might find ourselves
> having to do compatibility releases mid-cycle for the latest PostgreSQL=

> release. A change in pg_database such as we had previously wouldn't be
> an issue for the stable branch, but the changes to op classes etc. in
> 8.3 certainly would be of great concern.

hmm - understood. I guess I simply speculated that doing a pgadmin=20
release might be much more lightweight than doing a PostgreSQL release=20
(how many "backbranches" is pgadmin supporting?". I think I now=20
understand why you are doing it that way though ...

>=20
>>> I'm not specifically talking about complex patches (nor am I talking =
at
>>> all about bug tracking) - there are a variety of patches in the queue=
,
>>> of varying complexity. Some have been there for months, and worse, so=
me
>>> of them recieved little or no feedback when submitted leaving the
>>> authors completely in the dark about whether their work will be
>>> included, whether further changes are required, or whether they shoul=
d
>>> continue with additional enhancements.
>> that one I agree with - heck even people very close to the project are=

>> sometimes unclear about the status of this patch or that patch.
>> Part of that could probably be solved by the simple tracker you are
>> proposing - another way might be to promote more usage of the develope=
r
>> wiki.
>=20
> Yep, true - though the reason I promote the use of the tracker is that
> it could be implemented with minimal invasiveness into the existing
> process, such that it automatically captures all discussion on the
> topic, whereas I imagine some might object to repeatedly
> visting/re-reading/editting a wiki to discuss a patch.

you are probably right here too - though I can see some value in a wiki=20
too. Some things that come to mind are subproject specific todo=20
lists(like the XMLTodo) or the Wishlist (which is a rather abstracted=20
thing to point people to that ask "what can we expect in $release if we=20
are really really lucky" and don't want to parse the pgpatches list=20
bruce keeps)


Stefan