On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: >> On 02/09/2011 07:53 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >>> The previous three commit fests contained about 50 patches each and >>> lasted one month each. The current commit fest contains about 100 >>> patches, so it shouldn't be surprising that it will take about 2 months >>> to get through it. > >> Personally I think it's not unreasonable to extend the final commitfest >> of the release some. It doesn't need to be a huge amount longer, >> certainly not five months, but a couple of weeks to a month might be fair. > > Yeah. IIRC, in our first cycle using the CF process, we expected the > last CF to take longer than others. I am not sure where the idea came > from that we'd be able to finish this one in a month.
It came from the fact that we did it last time. > I do accept the fact that we mustn't let it drag on indefinitely. > But two months instead of one isn't indefinite, and it seems more > realistic given the amount of work to be done. The work will expand to fill the time available. -- 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
