| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: CF3+4 |
| Date: | 2013-01-17 05:01:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1358398886.21499.3.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 15:13 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think a realistic answer might be to admit that we've slipped quite
> a bit. Set the end date of CF3 to perhaps end of January, do triage
> the first week of February, and then start CF4 after that, about three
> or four weeks later than planned.
I'd suggest moving all the open items from CF3 into CF4 and start CF4
right away. If we did that, the number of patches in CF4 will be about
the same as in the last commit fests of the previous years, so it
wouldn't be completely off track.
If you postpone the start of the last commit fest to mid-February, I'd
expect that we will have a much larger number of patches.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2013-01-17 05:47:40 | Re: Hot Standby conflict resolution handling |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-01-17 04:52:31 | Re: bad examples in pg_dump README |