On 3/28/18 8:39 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 12:23:56PM -0400, David Steele wrote: >> I think this entry should be moved the the next CF. I'll do that >> tomorrow unless there are objections. > > Instead of moving things to the next CF by default, perhaps it would > make more sense to mark things as reviewed with feedback as this is the > last CF? There is a 5-month gap between this commit fest and the next > one, I am getting afraid of flooding the beginning of v12 development > cycle with entries which keep rotting over time. If the author(s) claim > that they will be able to work on it, then that's of course fine.
I agree and I do my best to return patches that have stalled, but I don't think this patch is in that category. It has gotten review and has been kept up to date. I don't think it's a good fit for v11 but I'd like to see it in the first CF for v12. > Sorry for the digression, patches ignored across CFs contribute to the > bloat we see, and those eat the time of the CFM. There's no question that bloat has become a problem. I don't have all the answers, but vigilance by the CFMs is certainly a good start. Regards, -- -David da...@pgmasters.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature