Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> writes:
> >> In this case, createdb - however, this particular case is of very
> >> minor impact to us. My gripe is more on the general issue of being
> >> potentially forced to add support for a new version and beta test
> >> tools in the same timeframe that PostgreSQL has for beta.
> >
> > I hear you, but really the only way we could promise that would be to
> > have a period before beta of nothing happening in the core project while
> > tools authors do their thing. ?That doesn't seem productive. ?We're
> > trying to get some parallelism here, not serialize all the development
> > and testing.
>
> Agreed - I certainly don't want to see things stand still. I just
> chatted with Bruce, and we discussed the idea of prioritising patches
> with API changes in the last commitfest to try to make things as
> painless as possible. I suggest we discuss this in Ottawa, when we
> review the whole commitfest idea.
Good. Also, as I said before, I think having the open items list on a
wiki is the best interface we are going to get; I can't possibily keep
such a list current myself.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
