Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> On fre, 2010-01-22 at 18:05 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Any ideas?
> The lower bound on the release cycle is about 12 months right now
> because we intend to support old versions for 5 years, and 5 or 6
> branches at once is about the most anyone can handle. That formula is
> tough to change.
Another problem is that it's very debatable whether users (as opposed
to developers) want a fast release cycle. Some of that reluctance to
update might dissipate if we had a better upgrade-in-place story, but
by no means all of it. People don't want to have to retest their
applications every six months.
I agree with trying to cut down the submission-to-commit delay, but
the release cycle length is not primarily determined by what patch
authors would like ...
regards, tom lane
