Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> In retrospect, the CF idea took some of the edge off the problem of > >> lots of large patches arriving at the feature freeze deadline, but it > >> is far from having eliminated the problem. > > > The beta preparation is dealing with all open issues, which is different > > than the focus of the commit-fest. Ideally we would be addressing those > > open/bug issues during normal development, but for the hard problems > > seem to linger and then we have to deal with them during beta > > preparation, which can take 1-2 months. > > We've never scheduled a "beta preparation" phase like that before, > and I don't recall you complaining about the lack of one in the 8.4 > schedule. Personally I think the slip is entirely due to the final > CF taking five months (we closed it 25-March) where we'd expected > something closer to one month.
I didn't bring it up because the schedule was kind of a first attempt and it didn't make sense to try and tune it at that point. -- 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
