Kevin Grittner wrote:
You've as much as said that it's a given that many of the contributors will continue to work on new patches during this period to earn a living, while hopefully volunteering to help with getting the release out the door on their own time. As I understand the arguments, having that occur as a "guilty secret", with no community discussion or review during that period, versus trying to find a way to organizationally admit the fact and try to manage the available resources in a real versus pretend way is the issue here.
It's not a guilty secret, it's not really a secret at all. People have in the past submitted patches during beta, and there has been extensive discussion about them. You just have to wait to get patches into the tree. In the past I suggested that we should branch much earlier to allow such patches to get into the tree. The argument against it, which I think is probably valid, is that we don't have the resources to manage both trees, and it could be a distraction for those working on polishing the release.
As for getting more coverage of Beta, part of my trouble in testing applications on Beta is that there aren't good tools I know of for capture and replay of usage scenarios. Now there would be a good project for someone, and it would be unaffected by the Beta cycle.
cheers andrew -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
