Re: 9.6 -> 10.0

On 05/09/2016 01:58 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:

> So this is probably just highlighting how I'm not up to date on the
> -advocacy discussion :) But I thought the idea was to have it
> integrated, and that *that* was "the product" in this case. As in the
> "breaker that makes it possible to do transparent upgrades without
> external products". Which I thought was the target for next release, not
> this release. But I may be confusing multiple discussion, and as such
> contributing to the confusion.

Yeah, there's multiple discussions, at least 2:

1. Should we promote pglogical in the beta as something to *test*?

2. Is pglogical a major-version-making feature?

--
--
Josh Berkus
Red Hat OSAS
(any opinions are my own)