On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I would have sworn I left this next to the bike shed...from the crickets > chirping I guess not. I did complete bumping forward the patches that > slipped through the November CF the other day, and it's properly closed now. > > As for CF 2012-01, I had thought Robert Haas was going to run that one. My > saying that is not intended to put him on the hook.
Last year, I tried to talk a fairly active roll in getting the CommitFest wrapped up in a reasonable period of time, and that didn't really get a lot of support, so I'm not particularly inclined to do it again. I have long felt that it's important, especially for non-committers, not to go too long between CommitFests, because that means going a long time without much opportunity to get things committed, or even to get feedback. And even for committers, it's not particularly productive to sit around for a long time with the tree closed to new work. Virtually nobody wants to grow a gigantic patch before seeing any of it go in; the chance of rejection is way too high. At least, that's my view. But, I've noticed that nothing good comes of me pressing my own view too hard. Either we as a community value having the CommitFest wrap up in a reasonable period of time, or we don't. If we do, then let's make it happen together. If we don't, then let's resign ourselves now to the fact that 9.2 will not hit the shelves for a very long time. -- 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
