David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:59:51PM -0400, Chris Browne wrote:
>
>> tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us (Tom Lane) writes:
>>
>>> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> I'd suggest we have multiple checkpoints during the cycle.
>>>> Checkpoint is a "patch queue blitz" where we stop developing and
>>>> reduce the queue to nothing. Perhaps a two-week period where
>>>> everybody helps reduce the queue, not just Tom and Bruce. Every
>>>> outstanding patch gets told what they need to do in order to get
>>>> it committed. FF is then just the last in a series of
>>>> checkpoints. Suggest we do a checkpoint every 2 months.
>>>>
>>> I like this idea ...
>>>
>> Don't we need to have a background writer process to gradually flush
>> this data so that checkpoints aren't so massive? ;-)
>>
>
> I'm proposing a DSCM with easy branching and merging to implement this
> background writer process :)
>
> The one below is already available, so we don't have to do a "flag
> day" with it.
>
> http://repo.or.cz/w/PostgreSQL.git
>
> There are git-cvsimport and git-cvsexport utilities which make
> communication between the legacy SCM and the DSCM straight-forward.
>
>
>
You are way ahead of us here. And my vote *still* goes to Mercurial, if
we're picking SCMs.
cheers
andrew
