| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Phil Currier <pcurrier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.5 release scheduling (was Re: logical column ordering) |
| Date: | 2014-12-11 16:59:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1343.1418317166@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 10:37:32AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> 2. It's not clear that we're going to have a particularly-impressive
>> list of major features for 9.5.
> How bad is the 9.5 feature list going to be compared to the 9.4 one that
> had JSONB, but also a lot of infrastructure additions.
Well, whatever the list ends up being, "let's wait until we have some
more features" isn't a tenable scheduling policy. We learned years ago
the folly of delaying a release until not-quite-ready feature X was ready.
Are we going to delay 9.5 until not-even-proposed-yet features are ready?
More abstractly, there's a lot of value in having a predictable release
schedule. That's going to mean that some release cycles are thin on
user-visible features, even if just as much work went into them. It's
the nature of the game.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-12-11 16:59:58 | Re: 9.5 release scheduling (was Re: logical column ordering) |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-12-11 16:53:51 | Re: WIP: multivariate statistics / proof of concept |