Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I guess I just don't understand why so many other projects larger
> then us and much smaller then us can do it, but we can't.
Perhaps it is a question of project culture. As I see PostgreSQL
development, there is no such thing as a roadmap or an agreed plan, what
"the group" will implement feature-wise. (Of course everyone agrees that we
should improve performance, support new SQL standard features, etc... that
is not my point). I believe it is pretty much each individual's (or backing
company's) decision, what features they will hack on. If there is interest
in a feature from more than one person, sometimes they will work together in
groups on that part. But I don't see anyone making lists of features that
should be in version X and then say: "Let's get this list of work done!".
(Btw. I think this is a strengh of PostgreSQL, not a weakness.)
As Bruce said, if you want to tell what will be in the next release, you can
only look at CVS commits and discussions. The projects of some people are
more likely to be in the next release than others, but who knows before the
patches are committed.
What I would find good for marketing is a list of features that should be in
the next release (after they have been committed to CVS). Nevertheless this
is not a trivial task. IIRC Bruce did regular updates to the release notes
during the development cycle of a release or two ago. He gave it up because
it cost too much time. Perhaps someone else wants to step up to maintain
such a list, not as detailed as the release notes probably.
Just my two (Euro)cents.
Best Regards,
Michael Paesold
