On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> > Whatever happened to this? ?It was in the first 9.0 commitfest but was >> > returned with feedback but never updated: >> > >> > ? ? ? ?https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=75 >> >> Well, the patch author chose not to pursue it. It's clearly far too >> late now, at least for 9.0. >> >> I'm pleased to see that you're not finding many patches that just >> completely slipped through the cracks - seems like most things were >> withdrawn on purpose, had problems, and/or were not pursued by the >> author. I think the CommitFest process has done a pretty good job of >> making sure everything gets looked at. The only small chink I see is >> that there may be some patches (especially small ones or from >> first-time contributors) which escaped getting added to a CommitFest >> in the first place; and we don't really have a way of policing that. >> Usually someone replies to the patch author and suggests adding it to >> the next CF, but I can't swear that that happens in every case. > > Yea, the complex issues are often lost, and I stopped tracking > commitfest items so I don't actually know if anything that got into the > commit fest was eventually just dropped by the author. We can say we > don't need to persue those but they might be valuable/important.
Yes, they could be valuable/important - anything that falls into that category is probably going to turn into a TODO list item at this point. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
