Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote: > > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > > I would also suggest that 8.3 be labelled a dev release. We have a > > > reasonable number of fairly invasive patches, so we need a mechanism to > > > integrate them with reduced risk. > > > > I would rather like to see patches we don't are confident enough in to > > be dropped from 8.3 and moved to 8.4 - the goal should not be jamming as > > much patches into a single release s we can (because they are proposed) > > but rather putting those in that meet the quality bar and we trust in. > > Yeah; the agreement we had was that 8.3 would be a short release. So if > we're going to take too long to review and apply the outstanding patches > we have, we should rather push them to 8.4, get 8.3 released quickly and > then go on with the regular annual release. The postponed patches can > be reviewed and committed early in 8.4, instead of at the last minute in > 8.3. Sounds like a smarter, safer move.
Because we are dealing with this now, and not later, we have time to give all patches the appropriate review time --- we don't need to panic yet and start throwing patches to 8.4, especially since we might have even more patches for 8.4. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
