"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> I *really* wish ppl would stop harping on the length of the last beta
> cycle ... I will always rather delay a release due to an *known*
> outstanding bug, especially one that just needs a little bit more time to
> work out, then to release software "on time" ala Microsoft ...
I don't think that's at issue here. No one was suggesting that we'd
force an *end* to beta cycle because of schedule issues. We ship when
we're satisfied and not before. I'm saying that I want to try to
*start* the beta test period on-time, rather than letting the
almost-beta state drag on for months --- which we did in each of the
last two cycles. Development time is productive, and beta-test time
is productive, but we're-trying-to-start-beta time is not very
productive ...
regards, tom lane