On 01/17/2013 12:48 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> At 2013-01-16 22:40:07 -0500, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us wrote:
>> However, since we already missed the scheduling agreed to then, the
>> question that's on the table now is what we should do instead.
> I suggest we close CF3 and bring the pending CF3 patches into CF4, but
> still have a triage of CF4 patches in early February. Until then, there
> are several patches marked "Ready for committer" for committers to look
> at when they have time (14 in CF3, 9 in CF4, with two weeks remaining to
> the beginning of February).
This seems sensible to me. 2012-11 is gone, whether truly finished or
not, and if everyone's OK with it I'd like to move all open work into
2013-01, close 2012-11, and open 2013-03 for post-9.3 work. That'll at
least provide a place for post-9.3 patches and consolodate everything
for somewhat easier tracking.

-- 
 Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

• Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 04:48:59 from Abhijit Menon-Sen

Responses

• Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 07:05:05 from Michael Paquier

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Michael Paquier	Date: 2013-01-17 07:05:05
	Subject: Re: CF3+4
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2013-01-17 06:38:31
	Subject: Re: Hot Standby conflict resolution handling