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.
(The only complication would be the pgindent changes which could cause
merge problems for some patches. It would be good to have a mechanism
to "update" a patch over pgindent easily.)
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support