Re: small but useful patches for text search

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 04:41:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> > I think it's clear that stretching feature freezes is a failed
> > policy.
>
> Yeah, it's the same old same old --- once again, we've bent over
> backwards to try to accommodate large patches at the end of a
> development cycle. I'm not sure that that's ever going to stop,
> because every time there are people cheerleading for said patches
> and insisting that the release will be so much better if we wait for
> them. Somehow we keep expecting that they'll get fixed and landed
> in a short period of time.
>
> A saner policy would mandate that large patches land near the start
> of a development cycle, but I don't know how we get people to do
> that.

It's not easy, in the sense of timing and will, but it's not complex,
technically. Basically, we start from a largest size we'll allow at
the last commit fest, and increase it to linearly to, say, twice the
size of the largest patch proposed at the first commit fest.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate