Re: Official Freeze Date for 7.5: July 1st, 2004 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

I really hate seeing all the developers wasting time and brain cycles on
this type of stuff.  I would much rather that time and brain cycles be put
to the design and development of the code.

Would a project manager type position be of any value to take some of this
off the developers and onto the project manager.? They would be the focal
point for this type of stuff and responsible to get updates from the
developers and check statuses and things of that nature.


|---------+---------------------------------->
|         |           Andrew Dunstan         |
|         |           <andrew@dunslane.net>  |
|         |           Sent by:               |
|         |           pgsql-hackers-owner@pos|
|         |           tgresql.org            |
|         |                                  |
|         |                                  |
|         |           06/01/2004 12:26 PM    |
|         |                                  |
|---------+---------------------------------->
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
     | |       To:       pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
             | |       cc:
                     | |       Subject:  Re: [HACKERS] Official Freeze Date for 7.5: July 1st, 2004
                             |
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|




Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Just so that everyone is aware, we are going to push the freeze date
>>> for 7.5 to July 1st.
>>>
>>> Although we feel that there are enough improvements and features
>>> already in place for 7.5, Tom's felt that if we gave it that extra
>>> month, we could also have PITR in place for 7.5 ...
>>>
>>> If anyone is working on other features that they feel can be
>>> polished off before the July 1st deadline, we would be most happy to
>>> incorporate those as well, but do recommend submitting patches for
>>> review *sooner*, rather then later, so that any recommended
>>> corrections can be addressed before teh deadline.
>>>
>>
>> I welcome this, as I always thought June 1 was too soon. However, I
>> think that the process by which the date was eventually arrived at
>> was unfortunate.
>>
>> I would modestly suggest that there should be a minimum period of
>> notice of a feature freeze - 6 weeks or 2 months seems about right to
>> me, given the
>
>
> Oh, you mean the original freeze date that was set at the start of the
> dev cycle 6 months ago?
>

I am far from being the only person to whom this was less than clear. I
also know that when I discussed this with one or two members of the core
team *they* were not clear about it either.

Maybe I missed something in an email somewhere ...

In any case, I think a target date should be set at the beginning of a
dev cycle and a hard date should be set closer to the end of the cycle.
Trying to adhere rigidly to a date set nine or twelve months previously
doesn't strike me as good practice.

cheers

andrew

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org






*************************************************************************
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: This communication, including attachments, is for the exclusive use of addressee and may
containproprietary, confidential and/or privileged information.  If you are not the intended recipient, any use,
copying,disclosure, dissemination or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient,
pleasenotify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this communication and destroy all copies.
 
*************************************************************************