Re: Releasing in September
От | Magnus Hagander |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Releasing in September |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABUevEwOhUmk8XZ=LiPuRGErSZt0bE7wG9XPnRj375Syv_930w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Releasing in September (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Releasing in September
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
-- Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Jan 20, 2016 5:03 PM, "Andres Freund" <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> FWIW, looking at the last few commitfests, aside heroic and
>> unsustainable efforts by individual CF managers, I haven't noticed any
>> effect of when fests started/stopped. Aside from a short time increase
>> in unfinished patches being posted the day before the next CFs starts.
> Yeah, we seem to be firmly stuck at two month long commitfests started
> every two months. The plan was for them to be one month..
> Maybe we should try just very drastically cutting them at one month and
> bumping everything left. No questions asked, no extra time for anybody.
> Regardless of if it's the first or the last commitfest.
> Just to see what happens. Because what we are doing now clearly doesn't
> work..
I do not think commitfest length is the problem (though surely it's not
working as intended). What happened with 9.5 is we forked the 9.6
I agree that it's not the same problem. I do believe that it is *a* problem though, and a fairly significant one too. Because there's *never* any downtime from CF mode, regardless of where in the cycle we are.
While not the same, we need to fix both.
We will not get back to on-schedule releases unless we can keep -hackers
working on release testing/stabilization when it's time to do that,
rather than being distracted by shiny new stuff going into the next
release.
Agreed.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: