Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > Bruce, >>> What's VC? >> >> MS Visual C++
> Given that this could lead to us recruiting more developers out of our > Windows user base, I'd prioritize it. Yeah, that's why I listed it as a major item. I haven't had a chance to look at the patch, but if it's not too ugly I would like to get it in this time rather than next --- that could lead directly to having more people available next time. > If you look at the two "incomplete" patches, and the "misfired" one > (Bitmaps, Updatable Views, and WITH RECURSIVE) all of them are patches > where the submitter had been working on them months ago, and might have > made the release (or let us know they weren't on schedule) if we'd held > them to an earlier deadline. Perhaps, but I'm not sure what we can or should do about it. Moving deadlines up will either create a dead zone where we all sit around twiddling our thumbs, or people will keep on coding till the last minute anyway. I think having a few patches that don't make the deadline isn't a bad thing: it means we didn't have people sitting idle. It's not like the work will go to waste --- those things can still get in in the next devel cycle. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster