On 01/17/2013 04:43 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Jan 17, 2013 8:15 AM, "Abhijit Menon-Sen" <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
> <mailto:ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> wrote:
> > At 2013-01-17 16:05:05 +0900, michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it really necessary to create a new commit fest just to move the
> > > items? Marking the patches that are considered as being too late for
> > > 9.3 should be just returned with feedback.
> > Opening 2013-03 is not so much to move existing patches, but to give
> > people a place to submit *new* post-9.3 patches without interrupting
> > the 2013-01 CF.
> Yeah, and +1 for doing that. The sooner the better. By whichever of
> the time frames for the cf that had been discussed, it should
> certainly not be open for accepting new patches for 9.3 anymore.
I've moved all pending patches from 2012-11 to 2013-01. I'll go through
and poke them for aliveness and start chasing things up; in the mean
time, any chance of closing 2012-11?
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
In response to
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 08:43:51 from Magnus Hagander
- Re: CF3+4 at 2013-01-17 14:54:43 from Robert Haas
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2013-01-17 13:29:58|
|Subject: Re: review: pgbench - aggregation of info written into
|Previous:||From: Andres Freund||Date: 2013-01-17 13:05:15|
|Subject: Re: Slave enters in recovery and promotes when WAL stream with
master is cut + delay master/slave|