| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: commitfest 2018-07 |
| Date: | 2018-06-05 14:43:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20180605144330.7twel6h43tvwygaz@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-06-05 10:20:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> > I'd rather create a new 2018-07, and just manually move old patches to
> > it. Otherwise we'll not really focus on the glut of old things, but
> > everyone just restarts working on their own new thing.
>
> I thought the idea was to clear out the underbrush of small, ready-to-go
> patches. How old they are doesn't enter into that.
>
> There's a separate issue about what to do to prioritize old patches so
> they don't linger indefinitely. We had a discussion about that at the
> dev meeting, but I don't think any specific mechanism was agreed to?
I think we've not fully agreed on that. I'd argue we should manually
filter things into the next CF. And both small patches and older things
should qualify.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Travers | 2018-06-05 14:45:54 | Re: Code of Conduct plan |
| Previous Message | Amit Khandekar | 2018-06-05 14:33:39 | Re: Concurrency bug in UPDATE of partition-key |