On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 13:50, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > We learned a few lessons from previous releases. First, don't delay > > the beta by days/weeks that drag on. Delay one month at a time. > > Second, don't decide on a further delay the day before you are going to > > go beta. Multiple short-period delays and delays that happen at the > > last minute cause too many stops/starts for developers to be effective, > > so... > > > > If we are going to delay beta, we should decide now, not at the end of > > August, and the delay should be until the end of September. The big > > question is whether we have enough material to warrant a delay. > > Beta goes down in 1 week ... if we follow what we had talked about before, > within a short period of time after beta, we should be able to let ppl > dive into working on v7.4 (or 8.0, whatever we decide to call it) ... but > let's try and stick to a timeline for once, else we are going to hit the > same as the last *very* extended release ...
Agreed. If patches are applied to the 7.4 branch as fast as normal, then maybe 7.4 will only be 6 months out with well tested Windows, PIT, etc. code that gets applied this October. Whats the intended branchpoint? Beta with less than 5 patches? 3rd beta start period? Less than 100 lines changed between betas? Where is the reasonable point where double patching isn't as annoying as waiting to apply new work? ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
