"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > We should get _all_ the known initdb-related issues into the code
> > before we go beta2 or beta3 is going to require another initdb.
>
> Right, and? How many times in the past has it been the last beta in
> the cycle that forced the initdb? Are you able to guarantee that
> there won't* be another initdb required if we wait until mid-next
> week?
I completely agree with Bruce here. Requiring an initdb for every beta
release significantly reduces the number of people who will be willing
to try it out -- so initdb's between betas are not disasterous, but
should be avoided if possible.
Since waiting till next week significantly reduces the chance of an
initdb for beta3 and has no serious disadvantage that I can see, it
seems the right decision to me.
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC