Re: Addition of extra commit fest entry to park future patches

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Alvaro Herrera <
> alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> >> Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >>> Yeah, we can do that. I'd suggest we either name it based on the
> current
> >>> tentative date for CF1 (september), or name it specificaly "9.7-first"
> or
> >>> something like that rather than just plain "future", to make it more
> >>> clear.
>
> >> +1 to both names suggested by Magnus.
>
> > We do need to pick one of them :)
> > Anybody else with preferences?
>
> 2016-09 would be in keeping with all previous CF names. 9.7-first sounds
> like it'd be more future-proof in case we change the schedule, but I'm not
> sure about that either ... what if we decide over the summer that parallel
> query is so cool that we should rename 9.6 to 10.0?
>
> On balance I'd go with 2016-09, but I'm not going to argue very hard.
>
> BTW, is there an ability to rename a CF once it's in the app? Seems like
> that would reduce the stakes here.
>
>
Yes, it's trivial to rename. That's the only advantage of our ugly url
scheme which uses the surrogate key in the url instead of the actual name
of the CF :)

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/