Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 07:16:33PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> There were some discussions about renaming the existing 2018-09 entry
>> versus inserting a new one at -07 and requiring patches to be moved back
>> explicitly.
> I would do that to reduce unnecessary log noise, but I was unsure of the
> actual status we are at. I am pretty sure that nobody is going to
> complain if what they submitted gets looked up two months earlier than
> what was previously planned, so I would vote to rename the existing
> 2018-09 to 2018-07, to rename the existing 2018-11 to 2018-09, and to
> create three new CF entries.
+1 for just renaming 2018-09 to 2018-07, if we can do that. We'll end
up postponing some entries back to -09, but that seems like less churn
than the other way.
regards, tom lane
