On Fri, 2010-01-29 at 12:23 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > Exactly. It would be nice to see 9.0 come out in 2010, and we're not > going to get there unless we start fixing the issues that are actually > release-blockers, rather than adding new features. Hot Standby was > committed with at least one known release blocker (VACUUM FULL) on the > assumption that that release blocker would be fixed by the committer > who introduced it (isn't that the rule?). Two months on, there is > zero sign of any activity on that front, and instead we're now being > bombarded with a series of other patches that fix issues that are not > release-blockers under the theory that the feature isn't good enough > to be used without them. If that's really true, it wasn't ready for > commit in the first place. > > If this were any other patch, I'd propose reverting it. >
I would suggest that if we don't see activity on the release blockers, pretty much stat... we revert it. Joshua D. Drake > ...Robert > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering Respect is earned, not gained through arbitrary and repetitive use or Mr. or Sir. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
