Hello
I disagree with it. There was no any request to move "ready for commit" patches to next commitfest! I expected so only unfinishing patches should by moved there by their authors. I sent question to Peter E. But without reply, but Tom did commits from thist list, so I expected so there is some agreement about it and I did'nt any alarm.
My patch there is prerequsity for "dump --if-exi
Dne 21.1.2014 17:41 "Robert Haas" <
robertmhaas@gmail.com> napsal(a):
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>> With apologies to our beloved commitfest-mace-wielding CFM, commitfest
>> 2013-11 intentionally still contains a few open patches. I think that
>> CF is largely being ignored by most people now that we have CF 2014-01
>> in progress. If we don't want to do anything about these patches in the
>> immediate future, I propose we move them to CF 2014-01.
>
> I think the idea was that patch authors should take responsibility for
> pushing their patches forward to 2014-01 if they still wanted them
> considered. Quite a few patches already were moved that way, IIRC.
Agreed on that general theory.
And, also, yeah, the shared memory message queueing stuff got
committed. Sorry, I missed the fact that there was still an open CF
entry for that; I assumed that it would have been marked Returned with
Feedback.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
