On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 10:46 AM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> > For example, replacing "Fixes and changes in PostgreSQL 19 Beta 4
> > include:" with "During the beta process, several features were
> > identified that unfortunately had to be reverted from Postgres 19 as
> > they require more substantial revisions than can be done at this point
> > in the release cycle. These features may appear in a later major
> > Postgres release. Fixes and changes in PostgreSQL 19 Beta 4 include:"
> Thanks for the feedback - I took an evening to mull on it. It's a good
> point, and I think we should address it. I would change the wording a
> little bit, how about:
>
> ==
> This beta release reverted several features that were originally planned
> for PostgreSQL 19. The PostgreSQL community strongly believes that first
> and foremost, PostgreSQL must be reliable. Additionally, the community
> strives for a [predictable release
> schedule](https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/). Because of
> this, the community chose to defer some features to a future PostgreSQL
> major release, giving them more time to work through the community
> development and review process.
> ==
>
> which sticks to the facts. I'd want to avoid more on the "why" since
> there's a varied set of opinions there.
Makes sense.
The one downside of saying "defer" is that its not clear that some of
the features may not be in a future release at all (e.g. I feel with
the "pg_get_ddl_" group of functions the future is a bit less clear).
Maybe:
Because of this, the community chose to remove some features again
from PostgreSQL 19, to potentially bring them back in a future
PostgreSQL major release, giving them more time to work through the
community development and review process.
Thanks,
Lukas
--
Lukas Fittl
