Re: 8.5 release timetable, again

From: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.5 release timetable, again
Date: 2009-08-28 03:39:17
Message-ID: 4A975165.5000200@cheapcomplexdevices.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus wrote:
> There's some very good reasons for the health of the project to have
> specific release dates and stick to them.

Help me understand why?

The Linux kernel seems to do fine with a "when it is ready" cycle,
where some releases(2.6.24) take twice the time of others(2.6.28)[1,2].
I imagine it has similar stability and lack-of-data-loss requirements
as postgres does.

I understand why commercial packagers like Ubuntu - especially public
ones like Novell and Red Hat who have to forecast earnings - want to
schedule their releases.

And I can imagine they'd appreciate it if project releases aren't
too close to their release schedules (if postgres releases right
after they release they suffer from not having the current version;
if postgres releases just before, they have limited testing time).

[1] http://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linuxkerneldevelopment.php
[2] http://fblinux.freebase.com/view/base/fblinux/views/linux_kernel_release

> So, with that in mind: what is your statement on three versus four
> commitfests? Does it make a difference to you?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message KaiGai Kohei 2009-08-28 04:07:18 [PATCH] Largeobject access controls
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-08-28 03:23:48 Re: join removal