On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Tomas Vondra >> <tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Well, me to. But my feeling is the patch received entirely insufficient >>> amount of thorough code review, considering how important part of the code >>> it touches. I agree docs are an important part of a patch, but polishing >>> user-level docs would hardly move the patch closer to being committable >>> (especially when there's ~50kB of READMEs). > >> I have to admit that I was really hoping Tom would follow through on >> his statement that he would look into this one, or that Dean Rasheed >> would get involved. > > I'm sorry I didn't get to it, but it's not like I have been slacking > during this commitfest. At some point, you just have to accept that > not everything we could wish will get into 9.6.
I did not mean to imply otherwise. I'm just explaining why I didn't spend time on it - I figured I was not the most qualified person, and of course I have not been slacking either. :-) > I will make it a high priority for 9.7, though. Woohoo! -- 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
