Re: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Announce: Release of PyGreSQL version 3.0

On Sat, 7 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> >>>> When is 7.1 being locked down?  I may be releasing 3.1 with a few small
> >>>> fixes and changes very soon.
> >> 
> >> You've probably got about 2 weeks before beta starts.  Bug fixes are
> >> accepted during beta freeze, of course --- just no new-feature
> >> development.
> 
> > how are we dealing with third party software like this though?  Stuff like
> > PyGreSQL and PGAccess should be "at the authors discretion", no?  As they
> > don't interfere with the core functionality and build of the system?
> 
> Well, a third party author always has the option to release his code
> separately on whatever timeline seems good to him.  But I think that for
> third-party code included in the distribution, the same standards ought
> to apply as for the Postgres code itself: we don't want people sticking
> alpha-quality code into a Postgres release tarball, whether it's core
> functionality or not.  It's not as if "no new features for a month" is
> a particularly onerous standard to meet ;-)

agreed about the alpha quality, but if someone like D'Arcy or Constantin
releases a new version of their code, is there any reason to hold off on
bringing that in?  Haven't we done that in the past with pgaccess as it
is?  I seem to recall Bruce bringing in a new release of PgAccess close to
the release, but am not 100% certain of this ...