Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sat, 2007-01-06 at 10:56 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Simon Riggs wrote: > > > All have been awaiting review for at least a month (though in one case > > > the latest version is quite recent). They probably ought to be on the > > > hold queue; all are ready to be reviewed for final > > > application/rejection. > > > > > > I'd hasten to add that none of those are mine. My patches have received > > > good attention, so I'm not complaining just completing admin. > > > > You might remember months ago that people were complaining I was pushing > > things into CVS too quickly, so while the patches are in my mailbox, > > they are not in the queue until I feel the community has the time to > > focus on it. > > I'm sorry if I explained that badly. All I meant to say was that the > patches aren't on the queue for review, so could they be placed at the > appropriate chronological point in the queue. (I was/am imagining the > queue to be ordered in time of arrival).
It is. > Patch review is, for me, harder than writing patches in the first place, > so with that in mind I don't expect it to happen quickly. You've > explained your on it now, so I'm patient. The issue is that the _hold_ patches are for patches that arrived after feature freeze. The patches that arrived after 8.2 was released don't go in there because it might cause confusion. I also have to control how quickly I push out patches from the queue so as not to overwhelm folks. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org