Re: [HACKERS] When is 7.0 going Beta?
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] When is 7.0 going Beta? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.21.9912062154180.823-100000@thelab.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] When is 7.0 going Beta? (wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck)) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] When is 7.0 going Beta?
(Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I personally agree with Jan on this...I think most users have found that our releases have been "worth the wait", and altho we're askign them to wait a little bit longer then normal, we *are* addressing problems with he current release by putting out 6.5.x's as required, *and* we are highly visible. unlike some projects out there (gcc's "past" coming to mind), we have a highly active mailing list where developers are constantly putting out, and discussing, news ideas...the end user sees this, and with what is on the todo list, 7.0 will be *more* worth the wait then our past releases...7.0 is looking to be our *biggest* release yet, a little more time will be required on this one... On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Jan Wieck wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > I am concerned about a May release. That puts us at almost a year from > > > the last major release in mid-June. That is too long. Seems like we > > > should have some release around February. > > > > Let's list the 7.0 items: > > [...] > > None of these are done, except for the system indexes, and that is a > > small item. It seems everyone wants a grand 7.0, but that is months > > away. > > > > I propose we go into beta on 6.6 Jan 1, with final release Feb 1. We > > certainly have enough for a 6.6 release. > > #define READ_BETWEEN_LINES true > > THAT'S MY CHANCE :-) > > Let's not call it 6.6, instead it should read 6.6.6 - the > BEASTS release. That number could probably make serious > database users/admins look somewhat more careful at the > release notes. > > > Also, I have never been a big fan of huge, fancy releases because they > > take too long to become stable. Better for us to release what we have > > now and work out those kinks. > > #define READ_BETWEEN_LINES false > > With all the PARTIALLY developed and COMMITTED fancy 7.0 > features inside, do you really think that release would be > easy to get stable? I fear the partial features we already > have inside lead to a substantial increase in mailing list > traffic. > > As far as I've read the responses, the users community called > 6.5 one of the best releases ever made. Many nice, new > features and an outstanding quality WRT reliability and > performance. Never underestimate the users community hearsay > in open source - don't play with our reputation! > > If we really go for a 6.6 release, we need to branch off from > the 6.5 tree and backpatch things we want to have in 6.6 into > there. Releasing some snapshot of the current 7.0 tree as 6.6 > IMHO is a risk we cannot estimate. > > > Jan > > -- > > #======================================================================# > # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # > # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # > #========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) # > > > > ************ > Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: