On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:52:40AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > Let me put a finer point on this --- whatever gets pushed to 9.6 > > unreasonably will be a feature we don't have in 9.5 and will discourage > > future development. I know we can't do magic, but now is the time to > > try. > > The other side of that coin is that the stuff that ends up getting pushed > will, in many cases, be stuff that nobody cared a whole lot about. > > One thing that continues to bother me about the commitfest process is that > it's created a default expectation that things get committed eventually. > But many new ideas are just plain bad, and others are things that nobody > but the author cares about. We need to remember that every new feature > we add creates an ongoing maintenance burden, and might foreclose better > ideas later. I'd like to see a higher threshold for accepting feature > patches than we seem to have applied of late.
Agreed. If the idea is good someone else will pick it up. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
