Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: damage control mode

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: damage control mode
Date: 2010-01-12 18:32:13
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:19 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
> <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> wrote:
>> You sound like you want to drop the last Commit Fest and prepare beta
>> instead.

> I think I was pretty clear about what I was proposing in the message
> with which I started this thread - bump some or all the big,
> outstanding patches to leave more time for stabilizing the tree.

> Almost everyone said "no".  That's the community's decision and I
> accept it, but IMHO it's a tacit decision to slip the release.

I don't think that was the conclusion.  What I thought we were saying
was that we didn't want to bounce those patches in advance of any CF
review at all.  But IMO we should put the larger patches on a very short
leash: if they don't appear pretty clean and trouble-free, they should
get postponed.  We need to minimize the time spent on new patches, but
we don't have to drive it to zero.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-01-12 18:37:40
Subject: Re: Streaming replication and non-blocking I/O
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-01-12 18:27:33
Subject: Re: NOT NULL violation and error-message

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group