Andres Freund writes:
> Apropos back branches: I think 52eed3d426 et al wasn't reverted and we
> didn't really agree on a solution?
I think we agreed what we wanted to do instead, but actually doing it
is on my queue and hasn't reached the front yet. In any case, 52eed3d426
is better than no fix
On 2014-11-11 10:52:30 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2014-11-11 10:18:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> We need to get moving if we want to have RC1 out before the holiday season
> >> starts. Accordingly, the core committee has agreed that we should wrap it
> >> next week (us
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2014-11-11 10:18:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> We need to get moving if we want to have RC1 out before the holiday season
>> starts. Accordingly, the core committee has agreed that we should wrap it
>> next week (usual timing: wrap Monday 17th for announcement Thursday 2
Hi,
On 2014-11-11 10:18:55 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> We need to get moving if we want to have RC1 out before the holiday season
> starts. Accordingly, the core committee has agreed that we should wrap it
> next week (usual timing: wrap Monday 17th for announcement Thursday 20th).
Ah cool. So ther
We need to get moving if we want to have RC1 out before the holiday season
starts. Accordingly, the core committee has agreed that we should wrap it
next week (usual timing: wrap Monday 17th for announcement Thursday 20th).
According to
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.4_Open_Items
t
