Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Gregory Stark wrote:
> > "Bruce Momjian" <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> >
> > > I think the only other thing we _could_ do is to re-open normal 8.3
> > > development, so we aren't hampering updates to trivial parts of the
> > > code. Many of the patches now in the queue had been developed for months
> > > before 8.3 started, so the hope is that we wouldn't have many more new
> > > large patches, but several small ones we could deal with while we
> > > whittle away at the larger patches during the next few months.
> > >
> > > The question is whether it is healthy for us to remain in feature freeze
> > > for months, and if it is unhealthy, what are our options?
> >
> > I don't see any reason development has to stop while the tree is in feature
> > freeze. If it led to patches being ready for review and getting reviewed and
> > committed early in the cycle rather than just before release I think it would
> > actually be extremely healthy.
>
> So you are saying just let people keep developing for 8.4 and we will
> use it as soon as we start for 8.4. OK. We might get to a point where
> we can just open development for 8.4, apply outstanding patches, and
> head for beta. ;-)
This is what happens with the Linux kernel. They have hundreds of
developers getting their hands dirty during a previous period. Then
2.6.20 is released; the 2.6.21 "merge window" opens, and all sort of
patches are flooded in. The merge window closes some time after that
(it's something like 2 or 3 weeks), and the stabilization period follows
(2 months?), during which 2.6.21-rc1, -rc2 etc are released. When
stability is reached, 2.6.21 is released, and the cycle starts again.
Sadly, we are missing the hundreds of developers. We are nowhere near
the scale of Linux.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
