| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Commitfest 2023-03 starting tomorrow! |
| Date: | 2023-04-09 23:55:54 |
| Message-ID: | ZDNQivfVFEjBGAjg@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Apr 08, 2023 at 09:50:49PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think that's largely independent. We don't look back at closed-out CFs
> as a kind of TODO list; anything that's left behind there is basically
> never going to be seen again, until the author makes a new CF entry.
>
> Anything that's to be treated as an open item for v16 should get added
> to the wiki page at
>
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_16_Open_Items
>
> It's not necessary that a patch exist to do that.
And patches that are marked as bug fixes in the CF app had better not
be lost in the long run, even if they are not listed as an open item
as a live issue. Sometimes people apply "Bug Fix" as a category which
would imply a backpatch in most cases, and looking at the patch proves
that this can be wrong.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2023-04-10 00:12:30 | Re: Show various offset arrays for heap WAL records |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-04-09 23:46:31 | Re: Commitfest 2023-03 starting tomorrow! |