On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 09:26:28PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 10:23:36AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 3:02 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> > > I'm inclined to change gen_random_uuid() to throw an error if the server is
> > > built with --disable-strong-random, like gen_random_bytes() does. That way,
> > > they would behave the same.
> >
> > No objections to do that. I guess you don't need a patch. As this is
> > new to 10, I have added an open item.
>
> [Action required within three days. This is a generic notification.]
>
> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Heikki,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> v10 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on
> open item ownership[1] and send a status update within three calendar days of
> this message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may
> discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed
> well in advance of shipping v10. Consequently, I will appreciate your efforts
> toward speedy resolution. Thanks.
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com
This PostgreSQL 10 open item is past due for your status update. Kindly send
a status update within 24 hours, and include a date for your subsequent status
update. Refer to the policy on open item ownership:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20170404140717.GA2675809%40tornado.leadboat.com
