On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > This is clearly a response to issues raised about HS and not a new > feature.
I don't find that clear at all. In fact, I find the exact opposition position to be clear. > It's also proposed in the most minimal way possible with > respect for the current state of release. Why is you think I want to go > to beta less quickly than anyone else? We're already in beta. I said nothing about when you want to go to beta or do anything else. > There hasn't been anything more than a minor bug in weeks, so not really > sure how you arrive at that the idea the code needs "stabilising". I don't agree that there hasn't been anything more than a minor bug in weeks. I arrive at the idea that the code needs stabilizing on the basis of the fact that we keep finding new bugs. > When people complain, I propose solutions. If you then object that the > proposed solution is actually a new feature, that leaves us in a > deadlock. Not really. You're entitled to say what you think we should do and I am entitled to say what I think we should do. I think we should wait for 9.1. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
