On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 06:57:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> > * Bruce Momjian (bruce@momjian.us) wrote:
> >> I will call for a vote that the freeze deadline be changed if this patch
> >> is rejected to due to time. I might lose the vote, but I am going to
> >> try because if we lose our reputation for fairness, we have lost a lot
> >> more than a week/month of release time.
>
> > I'm guessing the vote is core-only, but +1 from me in any case. I fully
> > agree that this patch has had a serious measure of effort put behind it
> > from the author and is absolutely a capability we desire and need to
> > have in core.
>
> I should think we'd have learned by now what happens when we delay a
> release date to get in some extra feature. It hasn't worked well in
> the past and I see no reason to believe the results would be any more
> desirable this time.
Right, the importance of the feature is not a reason to delay the
feature freeze.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
