Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules Bernd Helmle

Robert Haas wrote:
> On the other hand, it's easy to draw a line from the lax criteria for
> resubmitting patches to the length of this CommitFest. It now appears
> that this CommitFest will be something like 3.5 months long and that
> the next one will not occur before May. That means we're essentially
> closed to new patches for six months, which is a really long time. To
> put it another way, for every week the core team spends reworking the
> existing patches, it will be another week before someone can get
> feedback on any new patches submitted now. At some point that becomes
> a bad trade-off for the project as a whole. Judging when exactly
> you've hit that point is difficult, but I'm starting to think we may
> have entered the zone of diminishing returns.

Well, also consider 8.3 was released in February, so we had 9 months of
development before the last commit-fest started.

Also, one thing we have always known is that many of the complex patches
bottle up on the last commit-fest because we kind of realize they are
not going to get much easier to deal with.

As long as we are mostly busy reviewing and committing stuff, and not
bottled up on 1-2 patches, I think the time in commit fest is being well
spent.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +