On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On mån, 2011-09-12 at 10:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> I certainly think there is value in pushing an alpha release after >> CF4, and maybe even after CF3. > > Yes, that makes sense. Although I was surprised to see that the > download numbers dropped off significantly for the later alphas.
IIUC, alpha4 got the most, I guess because that was the first one that was alleged to be feature-complete. alpha5 had the least, but that's probably because it was just a bunch of bug fixes over alpha4, but not enough to make the result beta-quality, thus less interesting. Also, I think that may have been the one we forgot to announce. >> Whether or not it's worthwhile to do >> them for earlier CFs I'm less certain about, but there seem to be >> several people speaking up and saying that they like having alpha >> releases, and if the hold-up here is just that we need someone to tag >> and bundle, I'm certainly willing to sign on the dotted line for that >> much. We'd still need someone to write release notes, though, > > Writing the release notes is really the main part of the work. Bundling > the release takes 15 minutes, writing the announcement takes 15 minutes > (copy and paste), writing the release notes takes about 2 days. Yep. So perhaps the question is whether anyone's willing to do that work. >> probably someone to arrange for the minimal amount of necessary PR >> work (announcements, etc.), and (somewhat optionally) packagers. > > We've tried that in the past, and haven't had much impact. I think we at least need to announce the releases. Packaging is optional, but it's nice if people are willing to do it, and I would assume most packagers have this fairly well automated. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
