Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
---|
From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
---|---|
To: | <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 8.5 development schedule |
Date: | 2009-06-30 17:41:34 |
Message-ID: | 4A4A07FE0200002500028184@gw.wicourts.gov |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I think we used to do it more or less like that, but people
> didn't like it because they couldn't do any long-range planning.
Well, obviously the 8.4 release cycle did little to help them.
As has already been observed, there is a crying need to say "no" at
some point to get a release out.
It might actually help to do that on big patches if we don't let too
many tiny ones accumulate. I seem to remember the argument being tossed
about that "we might as well keep working on this one because there's
all these others to wrap up."
-Kevin
From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 8.5 development schedule |
Date: | 2009-06-30 18:31:39 |
Message-ID: | 20090630183139.GH4661@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> It might actually help to do that on big patches if we don't let too
> many tiny ones accumulate. I seem to remember the argument being tossed
> about that "we might as well keep working on this one because there's
> all these others to wrap up."
Yeah, and the people who was able to work on the small patches was too
busy helping on the bigger items.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
From: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 8.5 development schedule |
Date: | 2009-06-30 19:31:42 |
Message-ID: | 4A4A681E.6050001@archonet.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> I think we used to do it more or less like that, but people
>> didn't like it because they couldn't do any long-range planning.
>
> Well, obviously the 8.4 release cycle did little to help them.
>
> As has already been observed, there is a crying need to say "no" at
> some point to get a release out.
>
> It might actually help to do that on big patches if we don't let too
> many tiny ones accumulate. I seem to remember the argument being tossed
> about that "we might as well keep working on this one because there's
> all these others to wrap up."
Have you chaps considered a simple points system? Every patch would need
five minutes attention to triage it into one of: small (1 point),
medium (2), large (10), huge (50 points - Sync Repl etc). First CF gets
(say) 200 points, next 150, next 100, next 75. First-come, first-served
- if your patch goes over the limit it goes in the next commit-fest.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd