Re: Project scheduling issues (was Re: Per tuple overhead,
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Project scheduling issues (was Re: Per tuple overhead, |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200206101733.g5AHX1U24391@candle.pha.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Project scheduling issues (was Re: Per tuple overhead, cmin, cmax, OID) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Project scheduling issues (was Re: Per tuple overhead,
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Agreed on all accounts ... which is why this time, I want to do a proper > > branch when beta starts ... hell, from what I've seen suggested here so > > far, we have no choice ... At least then we can 'rip out' something from > > the beta tree without having to remove and re-add it to the development > > one later, hoping that they're changes haven't been affected by someone > > else's ... > > Well, let's give that a try and see how it goes. I'm a bit worried > about the amount of double-patching we'll have to do, but other projects > seem to manage to cope with multiple active branches... Yes, Marc has been advocating this, and perhaps it is time to give it a try. There are some downsides: o All committers need to know that they have to double-patcho We might have developers working on new features rather than focusing on beta testing/fixing. One interesting idea would be to create a branch for 7.4, and apply _only_ 7.4 patches to that branch. Then, when we release 7.3, we merge that branch back into the main CVS tree. That would eliminate double-patching _and_ give people a place to commit 7.4 changes. I don't think the merge would be too difficult because 7.3 will not change significantly during beta. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: