Re: 9.3 Beta1 status report

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 04:48:58PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 01:54:03PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > I am not sure if Tom shared yet, but we are planning to package 9.3
> > > > beta1 on April 29, with a release on May 2. Those dates might change,
> > > > but that is the current plan. I have completed a draft 9.3 release
> > > > notes, which you can view here:
> > > >
> > > > http://momjian.us/pgsql_docs/release-9-3.html
> > > >
> > > > I will be working on polishing them for the next ten days, so any
> > > > feedback, patches, or commits are welcome. I still need to add lots of
> > > > SGML markup.
> > >
> > > Can you please clarify the policy on attaching people's names to items?
> >
> > Well, I just pull them from the commit message, of it no one is
> > mentioned in the commit message, I use the committer's name.
>
> Hm, I listed code authors in roughly chronological order in 0ac5ad51
> (fklocks). I think that patch should list me, Noah, Andres, Alex,
> Marti.

OK, I have now listed them in the order you specified.

> > > This item
> > > Improve the ability to detect indexable prefixes in regular
> > > expressions (Tom Lane)
> > > I'm not really sure about it. Isn't it about the new pg_trgm code to
> > > support regex indexes? I think they either belong together, or perhaps
> > > the one in "optimizer" shouldn't be listed.
> >
> > I have no idea. I certainly see it affecting more than pg_trgm; I see
> > backend regression test additions with the patch,
> > 628cbb50ba80c83917b07a7609ddec12cda172d0.
>
> Ah, yeah, it's unrelated to pg_trgm indexing. It's a (backpatched) bug
> fix, though.

OK, removed.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +