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.
>
>
If we had multiple dev branches it might be more possible. That has its
own costs, of course - having a single dev branch makes management much
easier, and we never have to worry about things like merging.
Patches seem to be getting larger, more complex, and harder to review.
That is stressing our processes more than somewhat.
Short cycles would only make matters worse - the frictional cost of each
dev cycle is growing. I think at least we have learned not to repeat
this exercise.
cheers
andrew
