| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: damage control mode |
| Date: | 2010-01-12 18:32:13 |
| Message-ID: | 21698.1263321133@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:19 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
> <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> wrote:
>> You sound like you want to drop the last Commit Fest and prepare beta
>> instead.
> I think I was pretty clear about what I was proposing in the message
> with which I started this thread - bump some or all the big,
> outstanding patches to leave more time for stabilizing the tree.
> Almost everyone said "no". That's the community's decision and I
> accept it, but IMHO it's a tacit decision to slip the release.
I don't think that was the conclusion. What I thought we were saying
was that we didn't want to bounce those patches in advance of any CF
review at all. But IMO we should put the larger patches on a very short
leash: if they don't appear pretty clean and trouble-free, they should
get postponed. We need to minimize the time spent on new patches, but
we don't have to drive it to zero.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-01-12 18:37:40 | Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-12 18:27:33 | Re: NOT NULL violation and error-message |