Hi,
> But a question from Jinbao Chen is also relevant. May I rephrase it: > > What is the difference between REL_2_STABLE and REL_3_STABLE? There are > several commits that change the catalog and need a new version of the > catalog. But they don't add crucial functionality, so it makes no sense for > users to migrate to REL_3_STABLE (migration is a very tedious process). Yes, agree. We set the main branch to 3.0 to reflect the catalog changes due to only a few commits. If > there is no crucial difference and PG16 rebasing is almost done, what if we > freeze main and work on 14.4->14.20 in the REL_2_STABLE branch? All those > (14.4->14.20) fixes should already be included in PG 16.11 or not relevant > PG 16 branch. This will simplify the rebasing work, no need to fix merge > conflicts once again. > > And REL_3X_STABLE will be a PG16-rebased version. For now, I have no strong opinion on that 3.x will be a PG14-based or PG16-based version. If PG16 work is done, +1 to merge the cbdb-merge-upstream to the main branch. But strong suggest we have a main mirror branch like PG_14_Base/Main for backup in case of unexpected situations before merging the PG16 work. Just one question here: if we freeze the main, how can we do daily development? Minor kernel upgrade is only a part of our work. We cannot freeze all work.
