On 2015-05-29 16:37:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Well, maybe we ought to call it an alpha not a beta, but I think we ought > to put out some kind of release that we can encourage people to test.
I also do think it's important that we put out a beta (or alpha) relatively soon. Both because we actually need input to find out what works and what doesn't and also because it pushes us to tie up loose ends. A beta with open items isn't that bad a thing? There's many bigger projects doing 4-8 betas releases before a major one; and most of them have open items at the indvidual beta's release times. I think we should define/document it so that there's no hard goal of being compatible for beta releases and that the compatibility goal starts with the first release candidate, and not the betas. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
