| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: new tests post-feature freeze (was pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_dump) |
| Date: | 2016-05-08 16:28:13 |
| Message-ID: | 5428.1462724893@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My suggestion is that, from this point forward, we add new tests to
> 9.6 only if they are closely related to a bug that is getting fixed or
> a feature that is new in 9.6. I think that's a reasonable compromise,
> but what do others think?
Yeah, that's fair. I suspect that Peter's unhappiness with these tests
is partly rooted in the fact that they're just generic pg_dump tests
and not connected to any new-in-9.6 behavior. As such, it's not entirely
clear why we should be taking any stability risk by pushing them in
so late. We seem to have gotten away with it this time --- but it would
only have taken one more problem to get me to switch my vote to "revert
them".
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-05-08 16:29:27 | Re: new tests post-feature freeze (was pgsql: Add TAP tests for pg_dump) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-05-08 16:07:37 | Re: Re: "pg_xxx" role name restriction not applied to bootstrap superuser? |