Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> writes: > My personal opinion is that the community should not undertake a "rewrite" of > a nontrivial feature after freeze. The fact that a progenitor was present in > the tree at freeze doesn't make the rewrite much less risky than a brand new > feature. So, I suggest that you instead revert the patches and review that > rewrite for next CommitFest. Even so, I am okay with your current plan.
TBH, I think the odds are very good that that's how it will end up being; my standards for committing a large patch a few days before beta2 are going to be quite high. But I feel it's only fair to offer Tomas the chance to get something in this year not next year. Also, even though this can be expected to be heavily-rewritten code, the fact that there was a progenitor makes it less risky than a truly new patch would be. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers