Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > Post it to the pgsql-hackers list.
Well. I think I just did ;-) > I understand why using the commit fest process is attractive for this, > because it enables you to force the issue. But the point of the commit It enables me to have a slight chance of seeing the effort happen within the current release development time frame, 9.4. The next commit fest is going to happen in november, if I don't have code to submit at this time the next release will still have no solution to offer. > fest is to highlight patches whose discussion has mostly concluded and > get them committed. If we add general discussion to the commit fest, > it'll just become a mirror of the mailing list, and then we'll need yet > another level of process to isolate the ready patches from that. Well, even with what I said before, you're completely right in this phrasing of the situation, so I've just removed my two entries with no patch from the current CF. With some luck I will be able to revive the discussions and reach some consensus in time to have code written for the Open CF 2013-11. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine 06 63 07 10 78 http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
