"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
>> Now, if you just want to roll together what we have and send out that,
>> that is fine, but there are going to be significant cleanups in beta2.
> This is what I'm figuring ... if we roll and send out a beta1 right off,
> more ppl will look at it and report bugs then if we just say 'hey, its
> frozen, check it out' ... as I've said before, to me, beta is "we're
> getting ready to release, let us know what is wrong so that we can fix it"
> ... its at the RC level that we're saying we believe we have all the
> issues worked out ...
My two cents: once we ship beta1 we should try really really hard to
avoid forcing an initdb cycle before final release. We can make all
the portability fixes and code fixes we like, but we have to avoid
disk-file-contents changes and system catalog changes. If we force
an initdb then we're penalizing beta testers who might have been foolish
enough to load large databases into the beta version --- and yeah, there
were no guarantees, but will they do it again next beta cycle?
So my take is that anything that needs initdb doesn't get in after
beta1, unless it's a "must fix" bug. What have we got in the queue
that would require system catalog changes?
regards, tom lane
