Re: procpid?

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: procpid?
Date: 2011-06-14 21:50:30
Message-ID: 201106142150.p5ELoUL18276@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2011-06-14 at 13:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > There are real problems with the idea of having one release where we
> > break everything that we want to break - mostly from a process
> > standpoint. We aren't always good at being organized and disciplined,
> > and coming up with a multi-year plan to break everything all at once
> > in 2014 for release in 2015 may be difficult, because it requires a
> > consensus on release management to hold together for years, and
> > sometimes we can't even manage "days".
>
> I have had this fantasy of a break-everything release for a long time as
> well, but frankly, experience from other projects such as Python 3, Perl
> 6, KDE 4, Samba 4, add-yours-here, indicates that such things might not
> work out so well.
>
> OK, some of those were rewrites as well as interface changes, but the
> effect visible to the end user is mostly the same.

Funny you mentioned Perl 6 because I just blogged about that:

http://momjian.us/main/blogs/pgblog/2011.html#June_14_2011

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-14 22:00:07 Re: procpid?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-06-14 21:45:25 Re: Why polecat and colugos are failing to build back branches