|
On June 2, 2015 03:16:53 PM Zenaan Harkness wrote: > On 6/2/15, Jan de Visser <jan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On June 1, 2015 11:11:37 PM Arthur Silva wrote: > >> In my opinion a twice a year schedule would be good. > >> The LTS would be every 2 or 4 releases. Keeping 2 LTS versions supported > >> at > >> all moments. > >> > >> Maybe this should be reposted to the hackers list? > > > > Pretty sure this would be shot down pretty quick. At this point it seems > > more > > likely to me that the time between releases will be longer rather than > > shorter. > > Really, that sounds like an excellent way to test such an alternative > - if pg development went to what every other major libre project does, > we would not have a proper comparison of the outcome for the > alternative (lengthening the release cycle, rather than shortening). > > I know how I think it'll pan out - but personal opions matter little > here, only what the dev's choose. > > Whatever the outcome, this will be a great experiment in the long run, > providing a data point we would be quite unlikely to have otherwise!
I was overly short. What I should have done is direct you to pgsql-hackers where release schedules have been extensively discussed recently. Reading those threads will give you an idea about what the thinking process of the people responsible for releasing pgsql is. And whether or not their thinking lines up with other projects is not really relevant in my opinion - all projects are different, not in the least because the people running them are different. |
