Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Also, as discussed in 7.3, I vote against a feature freeze that is
> > significantly earlier (>2 weeks) from the start of beta. We did that
> > for 7.2, and it paralized the end of the developement period.
>
> The problem there was not the feature freeze, it was that we kept
> slipping the beta date while we waited around for certain items
> to get done. The lesson I take away from the past couple releases
> is that you set a target beta date and then stick to it; features
> that aren't in on time don't get extensions.
OK, let's follow that logic. Do we have enough to justify a release
without any of those features? I don't think so.
> In other words, we shouldn't be waving our hands and saying "there's
> still plenty of time for these things to happen for 7.4". There's
> not, unless we go back to the previous philosophy of "we'll slip
> the release as long as it takes for something to happen". I think
> it's past time to light a fire under the folks who are supposedly
> doing these items.
I do remember in 7.2 an attempt to come to a controlled slowdown 4-6
weeks before we even planned on starting beta. The later problem was
that beta start was one month late, and then dragged, so there were
multiple problems with that release: stop features late July, early
August; beta scheduled September 1, started October 1; then dragged
waiting for fixes rather than backing out features.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
