On 04/21/2011 11:16 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas<robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Peter Eisentraut<pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
I think to really address that problem, you need to think about shorter
release cycles overall, like every 6 months. Otherwise, the current 12
to 14 month horizon is just too long psychologically.
I agree. I am in favor of a shorter release cycle.
I'm not. I don't think there is any demand among *users* (as opposed to
developers) for more than one major PG release a year. It's hard enough
to get people to migrate that often.
I agree.
Another problem is that if you halve the release interval, you either
double the amount of work spent on maintaining back branches, or halve
the support lifetime of a branch. Neither of those is attractive.
I *really* *really* agree.
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
