On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> writes: >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 07:16:33PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> There were some discussions about renaming the existing 2018-09 entry >>> versus inserting a new one at -07 and requiring patches to be moved back >>> explicitly. > >> I would do that to reduce unnecessary log noise, but I was unsure of the >> actual status we are at. I am pretty sure that nobody is going to >> complain if what they submitted gets looked up two months earlier than >> what was previously planned, so I would vote to rename the existing >> 2018-09 to 2018-07, to rename the existing 2018-11 to 2018-09, and to >> create three new CF entries. > > +1 for just renaming 2018-09 to 2018-07, if we can do that. We'll end > up postponing some entries back to -09, but that seems like less churn > than the other way. >
Notes at [1] about keeping this commitfest for small patches. Just renaming the commitfest would mean all the patches, big and small, can be reviewed and committed. [1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2018_Developer_Meeting -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company
