| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.4 release planning (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Automatic view update rules) |
| Date: | 2009-01-27 15:40:43 |
| Message-ID: | 15276.1233070843@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> Updatable views is reverted. I agree that we should reject the rest and
>> prepare a release.
> That will send a fine message to those companies that have sponsored
> development work - that we will arbitrarily reject large patches that
> have been worked on following the procedures that we require.
"defer to 8.5" would have been better phraseology than "reject",
no doubt.
> We must at least have the solid belief (of a committer that that has
> done a proper review) that a patch cannot be polished in an
> appropriate timeframe,
I already pointed out some pretty serious problems with the updatable
views patch. Are you claiming they are trivial to fix?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-01-27 15:45:22 | Re: pg_upgrade project status |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2009-01-27 15:39:56 | Re: pgsql: Silence compiler warning on win32. |