On 1/19/16, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
>> I've cleaned up the code, created a separate JsonbRef node (and there are
>> a
>> lot of small changes because of that), abandoned an idea of "deep
>> nesting"
>> of assignments (because it doesn't relate to jsonb subscription, is more
>> about the
>> "jsonb_set" function, and anyway it's not a good idea). It looks fine for
>> me, and I need a little guidance - is it ok to propose this feature for
>> commitfest 2016-03 for a review?
> Has this patch been proposed in some commitfest previously?  One of the
> less-commonly-invoked rules of commitfests is that you can't add patches
> that are too invasive to the last one -- so your last chance for 9.6 was
> 2016-01.  This is harsh to patch submitters, but it helps keep the size
> of the last commitfest down to a reasonable level; otherwise we are
> never able to finish it.

I'd like to be a reviewer for the patch. It does not look big and very invasive.

Is it a final decision or it has a chance? If something there hurts
committers, it can end up as "Rejected with feedback" (since the patch
is already in the CF[1])?

Best regards,
Vitaly Burovoy

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to