Re: 8.5 release timetable, again

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Bruce,
> 
> >> None of those ideas have gotten a single vote of confidence
> >> from you or Bruce.  What's your suggestion?
> > 
> > Another solution would be to make major releases less frequent.
> 
> That's not a solution and you know it.

I do?

> Our development cycle has to change with the growth of the project.  I
> know you don't like change and are comfortable with how we used to do

I don't?  Wow, you are helping me see the light?

> things in 2001.  But at this point the old practices are holding us back
> and we need to continue growing, or die.
> 
> Our old development cycle was, effectively, single-process just like the
> old database engine was once.  Making development more efficient and
> better for all contributors is largely a process of making it parallel
> by the incorporation of more people on every step, which also requires
> increased transparency, openness and tracking.
> 
> Otherwise, like an overloaded database application in serializable mode,
> our development will just get slower and slower until it stops completely.

I have no idea how you know so much about me, but don't realize I was
saying that we should extend the release cycle so we don't release as
often, "make major releases less frequent" (every 12-14 months).  This
has nothing to do with how we process the releases, parallel or not.

As I have said in the past, we are nearing feature-completeness (in a
way), so having perhaps an 18-month release cycle is an idea.  That
would give more time for development compared to beta, etc.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +