Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > > > No, I agree that that would be foolish ... but there has also been alot
> > > > > done on the code over the past few months that even *one* of those
> > > > > features should be enough to put it over the top ...
> > > >
> > > > OK, what is the plan for feature freeze?
> > > >
> > > > As we going for June 1, and making no adjustments? If we have no major
> > > > features done, we still do June 1. Or are we waiting for one or several
> > > > major features to complete and then set a freeze date?
> > >
> > > 1 of the major features that are currently on tap (ie. Win32) *or* June
> > > 1st, whichever happens to be the longer of the two ...
> > >
> > > Indications that I've seen through this discussion are that Win32 can, and
> > > should, be done by June 1st ...so extending may be a moot point anyway ...
> >
> > OK, but I am worried about giving Win32 special treatment, and having
> > the date float like that until Win32 is done. This is what we did with
> > the SMP fixed in 7.3 and the date slipped week by week. We have to set
> > the date firm early on. I think we all agreed to that in the past.
>
> No no ... the date isn't floating on Win32 ... the date is floating on one
> of the major features (PITR, 2PC, etc) ... if Win32 happens to be the
> first major feature, so be it, but it is not contigent on Win32 ...
So you are floating the entire thing. I am tired of discussing this.
You call the freeze and when it is a disaster, you can take the credit.
I am not worrying about any freeze date anymore. You freeze whenever
you want to.
Floating a freeze data has always been a failure. Let's watch it happen
again.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073