On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> ... Well, the current CommitFest ends in one week, ... > > Really? I thought the idea for the last CF of a development cycle was > that it kept going till we'd dealt with everything. Arbitrarily > rejecting stuff we haven't dealt with doesn't seem fair.
Uh, we did that with 8.4 and it was a disaster. The CommitFest lasted *five months*. We've been doing schedule-based CommitFests ever since and it's worked much better. I agree it's unfair to reject things without looking at them, and I'd like to avoid that if at all possible, but punting things because they need more work than can be done in the time available is another thing entirely. I do NOT want to still be working on the items for this CommitFest in June - that's about when I'd like to be releasing beta3. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
