On Tuesday 27 January 2009 10:34:59 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 06:40 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > > 8.4-stable
> > > 8.4-experimental
> > >
> > > stable is everything that stable is. PostgreSQL at its best.
> >
> > I dislike this idea - it's same like short processed 8.5 -
>
> Actually it isn't because we wouldn't accept features into
> 8.4-experimental. The only thing we would accept into 8.4-experimental
> would be bug fixes that would automatically be ported up to 8.5 (or
> perhaps the other way around). We would still continue to build 8.5 as
> normal.
>
> > that is
> > more simple.
>
> We have tried the short release cycle before, it was called 8.2. It
> fails, remarkably.
>
I think this is a bit of revisionsit history. While I'd agree it didn't work,
the cycle was shorter... or to put it another way, would you say that the
commitfest model failed miserably? should we scrap that for next cycle?
I wonder...
Feb 1 - all remaining patches bump / beta starts
March 15th - beta ends / rc starts(note, giving 3 months for beta/rc, since we had a longer dev round)
May 1st - release 8.4, open 8.5 dev
June 1st - first 8.5 commitfest (we don't worry about short May because we
have built up patche queue)
July - second round of dev
August - second/final commitfest
Sept - beta opens
October - rc opens
November - release 8.5, open 8.6
December - first commitfest for 8.6
Jan 2010 - second dev cycle
Feb - final commitfest
March - 8.6 beta
April - 8.6 rc
May 2010 - release 8.6
<rinse, repeat>
--
Robert Treat
Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net
Consulting: http://www.omniti.com