On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> That may well be so, but adding another one is not going to improve >> the situation even a little bit. I don't think what you're saying >> weakens in the slightest the argument that I was making, namely, that >> if this isn't committed RSN it should be postponed to 8.6. Do you >> disagree? > > Well, the argument to my mind is about a suitable value of "RSN". > I think you were stating that we should bounce SR if it's not committed > before the final commitfest starts (ie, next week). I think we can give > it more slack than that. Maybe the end of the fest (where the length of > the fest is determined by the other open patches)?
Absolutely agree. Stretching the freeze to accomodate SR is what we should avoid, but bumping it before it's even started is completely over the top and would be the complete opposite of our past errors. Especially given that Heikki is spending significant time on it right now... -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
