"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Ah, you mean like we planned for 8.0 and failed, then for 8.1 and
>> failed, then for 8.2 and failed, then for 8.3 and failed? I can
>> definitely support that idea.
>>
> As I recall 8.0 and 8.1 actually went pretty well.
I don't recall any such plans for those releases, but certainly Josh's
proposal is *EXACTLY* what the plan was for 8.3, and look how well we
adhered to that one.
In point of fact, the big patches that aren't in 8.3 were rejected
because they weren't ready. They won't get into 8.4, either, unless
someone does a lot more work on them. So I don't follow this idea
of how we have a pre-loaded queue of good stuff all ready to go into
8.4. We thought that was true for the 8.3 cycle, which it wasn't,
but there isn't even any basis to think that about 8.4.
regards, tom lane