On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I think this is a rather unfair summary of the history. It was clear > very early in the CF that people thought Command Triggers had major > design problems, and Dimitri was doing significant rewrites to try to > fix that. Anyone who did not think that patch was at serious risk of > not being committed simply wasn't paying attention. Fair comment, since I was definitely not paying attention. My I-Want-a-Pony idea is some kind of rating system that allows us all to judge patches in terms of importance/popularity, complexity and maturity. I guess a Balanced Scorecard for the development process. So we can all see whats going on. We already do this when we speak to each other in hushed tones that so-and-so a patch looks unlikely etc.. If we could do that more openly it would help. > The more general point here is that the last fest of a release cycle > is the worst possible time to be landing big, destabilizing patches. > I think we ought to be conservative at this stage of the cycle, in > hopes of keeping beta phase short and predictable. There is a definite selection effect that means the bigger the patch the more likely it is to land later in the release cycle, regrettably. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
