Robert Haas wrote:
> >> We discussed doing this at the very beginning of 8.4 release cycle
> >> and, the more I think about it, the more I think it's not fair not to
> >> go ahead and do it. ?Otherwise, we're rewarding people for ignoring a
> >> guideline that was discussed, and punishing (1) the people who have
> >> refrained from submitting large patches at the last minute, (2) people
> >> who would like to see their already-committed patches released on a
> >> reasonable time frame, and (3) people who don't want the tree to be
> >> frozen for a near-eternity while we shake out all the bugs that these
> >> large, last-minute patches introduce. ?We're also increasing the
> >> chances the the final release will contain undiscovered bugs, since
> >> they will have had ONLY the beta period, and no part of the
> >> development cycle, to shake out.
> > Doing what? ?Not including HS an SR in 8.5?
> No. Pushing off large patches that weren't submitted until the last
> CommitFest to the next release.
Sorry, I am still confused. "Last" is the previous commit-fest,
November, or the final commit-fest, January. Please restate your
opinion in full. Thanks.
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-01-08 18:55:39|
|Subject: Re: damage control mode|
|Previous:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2010-01-08 18:36:44|
|Subject: Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking|