Re: Closing commitfest 2013-11

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Closing commitfest 2013-11
Date: 2014-01-21 20:21:50
Message-ID: 20140121202150.GJ10723@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Vik Fearing wrote:
> On 01/20/2014 10:31 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I think the idea was that patch authors should take responsibility for
> > pushing their patches forward to 2014-01 if they still wanted them
> > considered. Quite a few patches already were moved that way, IIRC.
> >
> > Agreed though that we shouldn't let them just rot.
>
> Does this mean I can resurrect my pg_sleep_until() patch? I didn't set
> it back to Needs Review after I completely changed my approach based on
> feedback. I would hate for it to get lost just because I didn't know
> how to use the commitfest app.
>
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1189

No objection here.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Claudio Freire 2014-01-21 20:27:18 Re: Re[2]: [HACKERS] Re: [Lsf-pc] Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance (summary v2 2014-1-17)
Previous Message Jan Kara 2014-01-21 20:20:52 Re: [Lsf-pc] Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance