On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> ... It is even more unreasonable to commit to
>> providing a timely patch (twice) and then fail to do so. We are
>> trying to finalize a release here, and you've made it clear you think
>> this code needs revision before then. I respect your opinion, but not
>> your right to make the project release timetable dependent on your own
>> schedule, and not your right to shut other people out of working on
>> the issues you've raised.
>
> Since nobody has put forward a proposed beta3 release date, I don't feel
> that I'm holding anything up. In the meantime, I have many
> responsibilities and am facing Red Hat internal deadlines.
See here, last paragraph:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-06/msg01093.php
On a related note, this list is getting pretty darn short:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_9.0_Open_Items
...partly because, in my desire to get another beta out, I have been
devoting a lot of time to clearing it out.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
