On 15/05/15 10:58, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 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.
>
Following rules like this is very important, but so is making valid
exceptions.
Though I'm in no position to judge the importance of this patch, so I
won't attempt to!
Cheers,
Gavin
