Re: PostgreSQL 17 Release Management Team & Feature Freeze
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>,
Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Date: 2024-04-09T12:27:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2024-04-08 Mo 19:26, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: >> I quite like the triage idea. But I think there's also a case for being >> more a bit more flexible with those patches we don't throw out. A case >> close to my heart: I'd have been very sad if the NESTED piece of >> JSON_TABLE hadn't made the cut, which it did with a few hours to spare, >> and I would not have been alone, far from it. I'd have been happy to >> give Amit a few more days or a week if he needed it, for a significant >> headline feature. >> I know there will be those who say it's the thin end of the wedge and >> rulez is rulez, but this is my view. > You've certainly been around the project long enough to remember the > times in the past when we let the schedule slip for "one more big > patch". It just about never worked out well, so I'm definitely in > favor of a hard deadline. The trick is to control the tendency to > push in patches that are only almost-ready in order to nominally > meet the deadline. (I don't pretend to be immune from that > temptation myself, but I think I resisted it better than some > this year.) > > If we want to change how things are working I suspect we probably need something a lot more radical than any of the suggestions I've seen floating around. I don't know what that might be, but ISTM we're not thinking boldly enough. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com