Re: Why is CF 2011-11 still listed as "In Progress"?

On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I would have sworn I left this next to the bike shed...from the crickets
> chirping I guess not.  I did complete bumping forward the patches that
> slipped through the November CF the other day, and it's properly closed now.
>
> As for CF 2012-01, I had thought Robert Haas was going to run that one.  My
> saying that is not intended to put him on the hook.

Last year, I tried to talk a fairly active roll in getting the
CommitFest wrapped up in a reasonable period of time, and that didn't
really get a lot of support, so I'm not particularly inclined to do it
again. I have long felt that it's important, especially for
non-committers, not to go too long between CommitFests, because that
means going a long time without much opportunity to get things
committed, or even to get feedback. And even for committers, it's not
particularly productive to sit around for a long time with the tree
closed to new work. Virtually nobody wants to grow a gigantic patch
before seeing any of it go in; the chance of rejection is way too
high. At least, that's my view.

But, I've noticed that nothing good comes of me pressing my own view
too hard. Either we as a community value having the CommitFest wrap
up in a reasonable period of time, or we don't. If we do, then let's
make it happen together. If we don't, then let's resign ourselves now
to the fact that 9.2 will not hit the shelves for a very long time.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company