Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?
Date
Msg-id 4F1232B3.5090901@2ndQuadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?
List pgsql-hackers
On 01/09/2012 09:56 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> The main question still lingering about is the viability of pushing 
> out an 9.2alpha3 at this point.  That was originally scheduled for 
> December 20th.  There was a whole lot of active code whacking still in 
> progress that week though.  And as soon as that settled (around the 
> 30th), there was a regular flurry of bug fixes for a solid week 
> there.  A quick review of recent activity suggests right now might 
> finally be a good time to at least tag alpha3; exactly what to do 
> about releasing the result I don't have a good suggestion for.

I would have sworn I left this next to the bike shed...from the crickets 
chirping I guess not.  I did complete bumping forward the patches that 
slipped through the November CF the other day, and it's properly closed now.

As for CF 2012-01, I had thought Robert Haas was going to run that one.  
My saying that is not intended to put him on the hook.  Normally we'd 
have an official deadline announcement by now too, which as one of the 
notable lagging cat herders I'm content to absorb a chunk of blame for.

If someone wants to advocate an early time for the official cut-off 
tomorrow, don't let me stop you.  But since this last one for 9.2 is 
"too big to fail" for me, I'm happy to take care of the announcement 
myself as the 15th comes to end relative to PST time tomorrow.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: xlog location arithmetic
Next
From: Gurjeet Singh
Date:
Subject: Re: xlog location arithmetic