On 10/5/18 3:35 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2018-10-05 15:31:37 -0400, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>> On 10/4/18 11:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org> writes:
>>>> On 10/4/18 8:34 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>>> I am suggesting to fix the issue after RC1 is released, but before GA.
>>>
>>>> That approach would mean we would require an RC2, which would further
>>>> delay the GA.
>>>
>>> Not sure about that. Alvaro seems to think there's a generic problem
>>> in event trigger processing, which if true, was likely there pre-v11.
>>> I don't think that patches that get back-patched further than 11
>>> need to restart the RC clock.
>>
>> Well, unless we are targeting it for the release? AIUI the RCs are
>> should be equivalent to GA[1] (and yes I see the qualifier of "should be").
>
> FWIW, I think that's a pretty pointless restriction. We release
> bugfixes in minor releases all the time, so there's imo absolutely no
> point in having a blanket restriction that a fix that we'd put in a
> minor release shouldn't be slipped in between RC and GA.
Sounds reasonable to me. Without this getting too off-thread, I'm happy
to update language on pgweb to better describe what a release candidate
is and how it can differ with GA.
Jonathan
