Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > Dave Page wrote:
> >> Actually thinking about it, I think we should plan the next cycle
> >> based on whatever ends up happening this time - eg. April freeze,
> >> Aug-Sept beta, Oct release.
>
> > I actually would be more inclined to have an even shorter cycle release
> > next time... e.g. January Freeze. The original idea was sound, make it
> > so we aren't testing in the middle of summer.
>
> I think part of the problem is exactly that the freeze period has
> stretched into summer, and so people aren't around for one reason or
> another, and so it's going slower than one could wish.
>
> As already noted, when we set the schedule we were not expecting to have
> so many large patches dropped on us at the very end of the devel cycle.
> What I'd like to think about is how can we avoid *that* happening again?
> Maybe there's no way, because human nature is to not finish stuff much
> before the deadline :-(. But dealing with a big patch logjam is
> obviously overwhelming the community's resources.
I am not sure the dump of patches at the end was the cause, particularly
because we are approaching the time where we are spending more time in
feature freeze than in development. I think the larger problem is that
these patches are just hard to review.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
