From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: small but useful patches for text search |
Date: | 2009-03-16 22:20:04 |
Message-ID: | 200903162220.n2GMK4p17220@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > The earlier commitfests were not time-limited either. They lasted until all
> > the patches were dealt with; either committed or bumped to next commit fest.
> > It's just that when you know there still at least one more commitfest a
> > couple of months ahead, everyone feels more happy to bump a patch and to
> > have one's patch bumped to the next one. In the last one, it's a lot harder
> > to do that because that means bumping to the next release, and you don't
> > even know when the next commitfest is.
> >
> > The original plan was that anything not 100% ready to commit at the
> > beginning of the last commit fest will be bumped to the next release, and
> > beta would start right after the first commit fest, a week or two after the
> > submission deadline. We failed to enforce that. In the next release cycle, I
> > think we need to be more explicit about that policy throughout the release
> > cycle and really enforce it.
>
> I mostly agree with this, but there is one fly in the ointment: if a
> patch really hasn't been seriously looked at by a committer, bumping
> it recreates one of the problems CommitFests were designed to avoid -
> patch limbo. I feel pretty good about the decisions to postpone Hot
> Standby and SE-PostgreSQL (not that my personal opinion necessarily
> counts for much, but that's how I feel); I would have felt less good
> about it if the same decision had been made a month ago. But on the
> other hand that means 8.4 will be a month later. If we could have
> gone through the same process two months earlier, or if we could have
> released 8.4beta and done those reviews on the side during the beta
> period, that would have been best of all.
Well, we have been working on stuff for the past month so it was not
like we were waiting on SE-PG to move forward.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-17 00:50:36 | Re: Problem with accesing Oracle from plperlu functionwhen using remote pg client. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-03-16 21:43:23 | Re: small but useful patches for text search |