From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Schedule for 9.5alpha1 |
Date: | 2015-06-26 00:09:02 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZT7td6JyzNtJze2-yCcJD+4coaH7RD8zHdLw6=aXt5Rsg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm tired of having to chase down known bugs when a patch has been
>> around for a long time, and an actual fix is blocking on committer
>> availability -- sometimes I feel the need to privately twist someone's
>> arm just to get something done that should be straightforward.
>
> Patience is the key here IMO, committer time being precious. And I
> guess that the requirement for the .0 release will be to clear all
> those items btw, so they will be fixed at some point.
Some more transparency in both directions, and the ability to triage
bugs would be nice. Sometimes things aren't that complicated, but are
still important (while other times, things can be complicated and
unimportant). I have no good way of making a representation about
which category any given bug fix falls under.
Also, while the commitfest app makes it pretty likely that someone
will get around to considering a bug fix eventually, the time that
that takes is completely unbounded.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-06-26 00:15:54 | Re: pgbench - allow backslash-continuations in custom scripts |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-06-26 00:08:18 | Re: git push hook to check for outdated timestamps |