Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> That's not an issue for me to rebase this set of patches. The only
> conflicts that I anticipate are on 0009, but I don't have high hopes
> to get this portion integrating into core for 9.6, the rest of the
> patches is complicated enough, and everyone bandwidth is limited.

I really think we ought to consider pushing this whole thing out to
9.7. I don't see how we're going to get all of this into 9.6, and
these are big, user-facing changes that I don't think we should rush
into under time pressure. I think it'd be better to do this early in
the 9.7 cycle so that it has time to settle before the time crunch at
the end. I predict this is going to have a lot of loose ends that are
going to take months to settle, and we don't have that time right now.
And I'd rather see all of the changes in one release than split them
across two releases.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company