Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes:
> FWIW, I'll comment that what we're seeing here is nothing new.
Certainly the Hot Standby situation is the same old song, different verse.
(I'm personally of the opinion that the project has usually been better
served when we decided not to postpone a release to wait for a specific
feature.)
SEPostgres seems qualitatively different to me, though. I think PG
people have avoided reviewing it because (a) they weren't interested in
it and (b) they knew they were unqualified to review it.
Meanwhile it's emerging that the selinux people don't feel qualified to
review it either. I'm not quite sure what to do about that. But "throw
it in there on faith" doesn't sound like an appealing answer, and I've
got no idea how long it will take to work out a non-faith-based answer.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
