Kevin Grittner wrote: > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: > >> That showed a January 1 beta release and a March 1 production > >> release. > > > > Terminological problem. Around here, "release" *always* means > > production release. We don't expect end users to be very interested > > in pre-production versions. > > Well, I actually phrased it with managers here that 8.4 was scheduled > to go to beta on January 1st, but that the actual release date was > less predictable because the PostgreSQL community worries more about > having a solid release than hitting a release date. Based on > discussions on the hackers list, I actually had the impression that > there would be a concerted effort to hit the beta date. > > But, yeah -- on this thread I got the dates confused a bit. I'm happy > to see that the slippage was less severe than I had got myself > thinking it was. A third of a year, rather than half.
And I have just posted that a lack of scheduled time for beta preparation was one reason for the slippage. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
