Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 8:40 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
On tor, 2010-01-21 at 18:05 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Well, we used to have the idea of a feature freeze ... is that going
to apply at the end of the commitfest?
Feature freeze was used to discourage the submission of very big patches
shortly before beta. The commit fest process has IMO alleviated this
concern. Beta is still the definite cutoff; and the closer we get to
beta, the smaller the acceptable changes become. I think that formula
basically applies throughout the entire cycle.
I'm not sure whether you're stating a position that's been agreed to
by -core or some other group, or just expressing your own opinion, but
I think feature freeze should be the beginning of the last CommitFest,
not the end.
The commitfest is a useful procedural tool, but I think attempts to turn
it into something more prescriptive are likely to meet significant
resistance. Even the old feature freeze was a bit porous, especially
early on during the freeze, when small, low impact patches were not met
with cries of "you're six days past the deadline".
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
