On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 10:46 AM Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]> wrote: > > For example, replacing "Fixes and changes in PostgreSQL 19 Beta 4 > > include:" with "During the beta process, several features were > > identified that unfortunately had to be reverted from Postgres 19 as > > they require more substantial revisions than can be done at this point > > in the release cycle. These features may appear in a later major > > Postgres release. Fixes and changes in PostgreSQL 19 Beta 4 include:" > Thanks for the feedback - I took an evening to mull on it. It's a good > point, and I think we should address it. I would change the wording a > little bit, how about: > > == > This beta release reverted several features that were originally planned > for PostgreSQL 19. The PostgreSQL community strongly believes that first > and foremost, PostgreSQL must be reliable. Additionally, the community > strives for a [predictable release > schedule](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/). Because of > this, the community chose to defer some features to a future PostgreSQL > major release, giving them more time to work through the community > development and review process. > == > > which sticks to the facts. I'd want to avoid more on the "why" since > there's a varied set of opinions there.
Makes sense. The one downside of saying "defer" is that its not clear that some of the features may not be in a future release at all (e.g. I feel with the "pg_get_ddl_" group of functions the future is a bit less clear). Maybe: Because of this, the community chose to remove some features again from PostgreSQL 19, to potentially bring them back in a future PostgreSQL major release, giving them more time to work through the community development and review process. Thanks, Lukas -- Lukas Fittl
