On 06/02/2015 03:59 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>
>
> On 06/02/15 04:27, Adrian Klaver wrote:
>> On 06/01/2015 07:11 PM, Arthur Silva wrote:
>>
>> In my opinion, FWIW, that really does not change anything. Whether
>> you are dealing with 20 new features over a year or 10 over half a
>> year the same constraints apply, writing the code and getting it
>> reviewed over a given time period. Add in the extra overhead costs of
>> more frequent releases and I see no gain.
>
> I disagree. The fact that we have 1 release per year means there's one
> deadline, and if you miss it you have to wait another year for the
> feature to be available in official release. That's a lot of pressure
> and frustration for developers. With more frequent releases, this issue
> gets less serious. Of course, it's not a silver bullet (e.g. does not
> change review capacity).
That is the fundamental issue, wants versus resources to fulfill the
wants. That issue remains regardless of the release cycle. The solution
lies in either restricting the wants, increasing the resources(more
developers, reviewers) or a some combination thereof.
>
>>> Maybe this should be reposted to the hackers list?
>
> Yes. And there already are threads dealing with this topic.
>
> --
> Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>
>
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com