On 15/05/15 10:58, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:57:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> writes:
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
I will call for a vote that the freeze deadline be changed if this patch
is rejected to due to time. I might lose the vote, but I am going to
try because if we lose our reputation for fairness, we have lost a lot
more than a week/month of release time.
I'm guessing the vote is core-only, but +1 from me in any case. I fully
agree that this patch has had a serious measure of effort put behind it
from the author and is absolutely a capability we desire and need to
have in core.
I should think we'd have learned by now what happens when we delay a
release date to get in some extra feature. It hasn't worked well in
the past and I see no reason to believe the results would be any more
desirable this time.
Right, the importance of the feature is not a reason to delay the
feature freeze.
Following rules like this is very important, but so is making valid
exceptions.
Though I'm in no position to judge the importance of this patch, so I
won't attempt to!
Cheers,
Gavin
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
