Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> No, changing that wasn't what I meant to suggest. My point here is that > >> we'd dropped a number of big mushy discussions into the queue with the > >> idea that they'd be re-opened during commit fest, but new discussion > >> did not happen to any useful extent. Conclusion: don't bother putting > >> anything less concrete than a patch on the fest queue. > > > So when/how do those discussions get resolved? > > [ shrug... ] You can't force ideas to happen on a schedule. > > If you don't want an issue to get forgotten, then make a TODO entry for > it. But the purpose of commit fest is to make sure we deal with things > that can be dealt with in a timely fashion. It's not going to cause > solutions to unsolved problems to appear from nowhere.
I need is to know if they are ideas worthy of TODO. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers