Re: [CORE] postpone next week's release
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
From: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
pgsql-core <pgsql-core@postgresql.org>
Date: 2015-05-29T21:14:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On May 29, 2015 2:12:24 PM PDT, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:04:59PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: >> On 2015-05-29 16:37:00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> > Well, maybe we ought to call it an alpha not a beta, but I think we >ought >> > to put out some kind of release that we can encourage people to >test. >> >> I also do think it's important that we put out a beta (or alpha) >> relatively soon. Both because we actually need input to find out what >> works and what doesn't and also because it pushes us to tie up loose >> ends. >> >> A beta with open items isn't that bad a thing? There's many bigger >> projects doing 4-8 betas releases before a major one; and most of >them >> have open items at the indvidual beta's release times. >> >> I think we should define/document it so that there's no hard goal of >> being compatible for beta releases and that the compatibility goal >> starts with the first release candidate, and not the betas. > >Do we need release notes for an alpha? Once I do the release notes, it >is possible to miss subtle changes in the code that aren't mentioned in >commit messages. Yes I think so. Otherwise it's pretty useless for people not following closely. I see little point in explicitly delaying release note work any further. Andres --- Please excuse brevity and formatting - I am writing this on my mobile phone.
Commits
-
Add Valgrind buffer access instrumentation.
- 1e0dfd166b3f 14.0 landed
-
Fix wrong merge resolution making pg_receivexlog fail in 9.2.
- 6b700301c36e 9.2.11 cited