Thread: RC1 on Friday?
Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
News to me ... On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road > + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) >
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > News to me ... > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? I am asking. We almost got to RC1 last Friday, so I figured we could do RC1 this Friday. The changes between betas is minimal. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > News to me ... > > > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > Are we still on schedule for RC1 on Friday? > > I am asking. We almost got to RC1 last Friday, so I figured we could do > RC1 this Friday. The changes between betas is minimal. Since beta4 was a dead attempt (well, riddled with fixes that were required), I'd like to announce and get beta5 out there and tested *before* we do RC1 ... Tom, my understanding is that CONVERT stuff required an initdb, and was also the only thing 'critical' that went in ... correct? What impact does that have? For instance, could it cause one of the regression tests to fail, or is it something that is relatively benign?
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> Tom, my understanding is that CONVERT stuff required an initdb, and was
> also the only thing 'critical' that went in ... correct? What impact does
> that have? For instance, could it cause one of the regression tests to
> fail, or is it something that is relatively benign?
I would like to think it's a pretty safe change, but that's why we do
betas ;-).
More seriously, we are still attacking various portability issues, and
there is still some undone docs work. I doubt we can make a tarball
tomorrow that is an honest release candidate. Maybe Monday?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Tom, my understanding is that CONVERT stuff required an initdb, and was > > also the only thing 'critical' that went in ... correct? What impact does > > that have? For instance, could it cause one of the regression tests to > > fail, or is it something that is relatively benign? > > I would like to think it's a pretty safe change, but that's why we do > betas ;-). > > More seriously, we are still attacking various portability issues, and > there is still some undone docs work. I doubt we can make a tarball > tomorrow that is an honest release candidate. Maybe Monday? OK, but we are already in month 2, week 1 on beta. As some point, we have to decide we are not going to do any more platform tweeking and move on to a release. If they really wanted their platform supported, they should have shown up on September. I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not hold up release to support some obscure platform. I don't think we want another 4 month beta! -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > hold up release to support some obscure platform. > > As long as the docs are unfinished, I don't feel any particular > compunction about not applying portability fixes. If you want RC1 > tomorrow, when are you going to update the release history? That takes 5 minutes. I will do it now. I am not pushing Friday, but I am saying we need to have some urgency to get to RC1 or we will drag. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not
> hold up release to support some obscure platform.
As long as the docs are unfinished, I don't feel any particular
compunction about not applying portability fixes. If you want RC1
tomorrow, when are you going to update the release history?
regards, tom lane
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes: > > Tom, my understanding is that CONVERT stuff required an initdb, and was > > also the only thing 'critical' that went in ... correct? What impact does > > that have? For instance, could it cause one of the regression tests to > > fail, or is it something that is relatively benign? > > I would like to think it's a pretty safe change, but that's why we do > betas ;-). > > More seriously, we are still attacking various portability issues, and > there is still some undone docs work. I doubt we can make a tarball > tomorrow that is an honest release candidate. Maybe Monday? 'K, let me announce beta5 tonight, and let's talk about RC1 on Monday (not plan for it, just plan to talk about it)
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug*
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > > hold up release to support some obscure platform. > > > > As long as the docs are unfinished, I don't feel any particular > > compunction about not applying portability fixes. If you want RC1 > > tomorrow, when are you going to update the release history? > > That takes 5 minutes. I will do it now. I am not pushing Friday, but I > am saying we need to have some urgency to get to RC1 or we will drag. I haven't noticed any 'drag' so far this release ... we had a long beta between 2 and 3, but 3->4 and 4->5 have been really short (so short that 4 didn't exist) ...
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as > solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug* All I am saying is that I would like to generate some urgency to get people focused on resolving the open issues so we can get this done. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 13:44:11 -0400, "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> wrote: > > I haven't noticed any 'drag' so far this release ... we had a long beta > between 2 and 3, but 3->4 and 4->5 have been really short (so short that 4 > didn't exist) ... I managed to be running beta 4 for a day. At least I didn't need to do an initdb to upgrade to beta 5.
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > > > You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as > > solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug* > > All I am saying is that I would like to generate some urgency to get > people focused on resolving the open issues so we can get this done. What are the current "open issues"?
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > > > > > You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as > > > solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug* > > > > All I am saying is that I would like to generate some urgency to get > > people focused on resolving the open issues so we can get this done. > > What are the current "open issues"? None. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > > > > > > > You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as > > > > solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug* > > > > > > All I am saying is that I would like to generate some urgency to get > > > people focused on resolving the open issues so we can get this done. > > > > What are the current "open issues"? > > None. 'K, so what are we generating urgency to get ppl focused on then? *puzzled look*
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 7 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I am loosing tolerance for these last-minute changes. We should not > > > > > > > > > > You might be, I'm not ... when we finally release v7.3, it will be *as > > > > > solid* as our previous releases ... *shrug* > > > > > > > > All I am saying is that I would like to generate some urgency to get > > > > people focused on resolving the open issues so we can get this done. > > > > > > What are the current "open issues"? > > > > None. > > 'K, so what are we generating urgency to get ppl focused on then? *puzzled > look* The urgency is that we should focus on getting to RC1. The issue is that we don't have anything to focus on, so why delay? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > The urgency is that we should focus on getting to RC1. The issue is > that we don't have anything to focus on, so why delay? well, right now, we are waiting for an updated 'supported platforms' list due to having to put out beta5 :(
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > The urgency is that we should focus on getting to RC1. The issue is > > that we don't have anything to focus on, so why delay? > > well, right now, we are waiting for an updated 'supported platforms' list > due to having to put out beta5 :( The changes since our platform reports are _not_ platform-specific, so I don't think we need to run through all platforms again. Even so, it is good to wait until Monday to see if anything pops out. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > The urgency is that we should focus on getting to RC1. The issue is > > > that we don't have anything to focus on, so why delay? > > > > well, right now, we are waiting for an updated 'supported platforms' list > > due to having to put out beta5 :( > > The changes since our platform reports are _not_ platform-specific, so I > don't think we need to run through all platforms again. Even so, it is > good to wait until Monday to see if anything pops out. So, you are saying that the changes that tom made that required an initdb of those testing will not impact, in any way, how postgresql operates on any of those platforms that have been reported on already? tom, do you have as much confidence in your changes as bruce? if so, why didn't we just go to RC1, instead of a beta?
Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > The urgency is that we should focus on getting to RC1. The issue is > > > > that we don't have anything to focus on, so why delay? > > > > > > well, right now, we are waiting for an updated 'supported platforms' list > > > due to having to put out beta5 :( > > > > The changes since our platform reports are _not_ platform-specific, so I > > don't think we need to run through all platforms again. Even so, it is > > good to wait until Monday to see if anything pops out. > > So, you are saying that the changes that tom made that required an initdb > of those testing will not impact, in any way, how postgresql operates on > any of those platforms that have been reported on already? > > tom, do you have as much confidence in your changes as bruce? if so, why > didn't we just go to RC1, instead of a beta? I can answer that. The feeling was that because we were requiring initdb during beta, we needed _a_ beta with the new catalog format before going to RC1. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> tom, do you have as much confidence in your changes as bruce? if so, why
> didn't we just go to RC1, instead of a beta?
It's not really "do I think these changes are risky?" --- it's more
"do I think we're done yet?" To me, an RC label means we think this
might actually be the released code. We're not there yet ... almost
... but not yet.
regards, tom lane