On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:50 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two items still undergoing work (collations, sync rep) weren't at that
> level of readiness, needing some mere "dusting off" to make them
> ready. Rather, they needed substantial examination and modification
> before they'd be ready. And, while this has doubtless aroused some
> ire, it doesn't intrinsically make those items "broken."
I don't think it really aroused that much ire. It's pretty clear that
both of those patches cost us something on the schedule, and I would
have preferred to see them committed sooner and with fewer bugs. But
they are great features. Unfortunately, we have a tendency to leave
things to the last minute, and that's something I think we could
improve. We have gotten a bit better but there is clearly room for
further improvement. With beta having gotten pushed out to the end of
the month, there is a real chance that we are going to end up
releasing in the fall again, and I would have much preferred July 1.
But given how long CF4 lasted and how much surgery was required
afterwards, it was an unfixable problem. It's not going to get any
better unless we get more serious about getting these big features
done early in the cycle, or postponing them to the next release if
they aren't. Anyway, I'm drifting off topic: nothing against the
patches, at least on my part, just want to make the schedule.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
