On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Peter Geoghegan <p...@heroku.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Kouhei Kaigai <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> wrote: >> It is nearly obvious problem, and bugfix patch already exists. > > My current strategy is to post these items on the "PostgreSQL 9.5 Open > Items" page, even when the issue is totally trivial -- maybe that > makes a small difference, even if it sometimes feels inappropriate for > small items.
This is the right approach to me, this page being dedicated to that. And I am doing the same when I spot something. > I'm tired of having to chase down known bugs when a patch has been > around for a long time, and an actual fix is blocking on committer > availability -- sometimes I feel the need to privately twist someone's > arm just to get something done that should be straightforward. Patience is the key here IMO, committer time being precious. And I guess that the requirement for the .0 release will be to clear all those items btw, so they will be fixed at some point. > If this is the way things are supposed to work, we should document known bugs > in the alpha release notes. Perhaps. Being able to track them in the code tree does not sound like a bad thing to me. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
