On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 16:19 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Assuming we want a release Postgres 9.0 by mid-August, here is how the
timetable would look:
Need RC release to be stable for 1-2 weeks before final
RC must be released by August 1
Beta must be stable for 2-3
On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
My understanding was beta 2 would be out on 7th June. Is that changing?
Thom
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Thom Brown wrote:
On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
My understanding was beta 2 would be out on 7th June. Is that changing?
Yes, but Simon is correct in that 4-5 weeks
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Thom Brown thombr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
My understanding was beta 2 would be out on 7th June. Is that changing?
No. It's very
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 15:14 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Thom Brown thombr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
My understanding was beta 2
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Thom Brown wrote:
On 31 May 2010 09:33, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
My understanding was beta 2 would be out on 7th June. Is that changing?
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
Eh?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-05/msg01649.php
You can hardly claim to have not seen it.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is actually available.
How many beta testers out there *rely* on a package to do their testing?
I'm not
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is actually available.
How many beta testers out there *rely* on a
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is actually available.
How many beta
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
My guess would be most of them.
Do we not have any stats on # of beta downloads per package type? I use
FreeBSD ports when installing production, but when testing non-released
code, I generally use the source code itself and build ...
Marc
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Well, they can just grab nightly snapshots and test, right? I don't
think a beta is fundamentally different from a nightly snapshot,
source-code wise.
doesn't really give a good reference point for testing
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
My guess would be most of them.
Do we not have any stats on # of beta downloads per package type? I use
FreeBSD ports when installing production, but when testing
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Well, they can just grab nightly snapshots and test, right? I don't
think a beta is fundamentally different from a nightly snapshot,
source-code wise.
doesn't really
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Mon, 31 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
I find myself entirely unimpressed by proposals to make releases
according to some rigid schedule that takes no account of whether
packaging manpower is actually available.
How many beta testers out there *rely*
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 11:10 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
We're currently at 4 weeks since last beta, with no new beta in sight.
Eh?
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-05/msg01649.php
You can hardly claim to have not seen it.
Yes,
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 11:30 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Well, they can just grab nightly snapshots and test, right? I don't
think a beta is fundamentally different from a nightly snapshot,
source-code wise.
There is only one difference: the signal to re-test.
Most people read new beta as
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote:
Assuming we want a release Postgres 9.0 by mid-August, here is how the
timetable would look:
Need RC release to be stable for 1-2 weeks before final
RC must be released by August 1
Beta must
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a really short list.
Thoughts on a few of the remaining items:
Type Mismatch Error in Set Returning Functions - tgl says this is a
deliberate change per link I just added to the wiki. do we think more
is required
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Thoughts on a few of the remaining items:
Should we revert the default output format for bytea to the old style
before shipping 9.0.0? - Consensus seems to be no, thus no action is
required.
I think we should leave that there for awhile, though I
On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 5:58 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
Thoughts on a few of the remaining items:
Should we revert the default output format for bytea to the old style
before shipping 9.0.0? - Consensus seems to be no, thus no action is
22 matches
Mail list logo
