On Thu, 29 Apr 2004, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Well, if Win32 doesn't complete by June 1, do we still do the feature
> > freeze? I don't want to be adding features after the freeze, that is
> [...]
> > As I remember, we decided that we should not make decisions to extend
> > the feature freeze date just before the freeze date because it causes
> > people to stop doing development, then we extend. I think we should
> go
> > another week or two then decide if we should stay to June 1, and if we
> > don't, we should schedule for July 1. Extending it by a week at a
> time,
> > and almost before the deadline, has caused considerable waste of time
> in
> > the past.
>
> I agree 100%. Right now the win32 side doesn't qualify for beta...just
> the date issue alone is a pretty big deal, IMO. There are pending
> patches for only about 50% of the outstanding issues. A tremendous
> amount of work has been done, but there is still quite a bit to be done
> to meet basic QC guidelines.
>
> So I suggest (my choices are of course subjective):
> Dividing
> win32 'should fix' (installer, /contrib, etc.)
> win32 'must fix' (psql query cancel, <1970 dates, non-cygwin regression)
actually, IMHO, some of these should be classified as bug fixes, assuming
that the patches are already in the source tree, and don't affect the
feature freeze in any way, only the release ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
