Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Hmm. There's something to what you say, but what about the people who
> were expecting their patches to be reviewed and perhaps committed in
> the forthcoming CommitFest. I proposed a schedule for this release
> that involved only three CommitFests and it was rejected, so it seems
> a bit unfair to pull the rug out from under people at the eleventh
> hour. Will we lose developers if we do this?
Well the RRR people will not be able to help much with SR, will we?
So I'm not sure about what you say, but running the commitfest as usual
seems entirely feasible while continuing the efforts on SR. Now, only
the last action item of the commitfest is to be spoken of, namely the
one we always struggle with: finding commiter time to finish up the
work. I guess the 4 new commiters will help, even if I guess Simon will
be exclusively focused on HS+SR issues and review.
> Unfortunately, there are some patches that I probably will not feel
> confident to commit without your input - in particular, writeable
> CTEs, listen/notify, more frame options in window functions - and I
> venture to say there may not be too many other takers either. So
> we're going to have to confront the question of whether it's fair to
> make those people wait a year. Maybe that is the right decision and
> maybe it's not, but I want to make sure we are thinking about our
> developer community as well as our user community, because without
> them we are dead.
What about asking for input from authors themselves? Like would you be
really upset if we had SR in 8.5, surely meaning lots of new users (and
development contract opportunities), at the cost of not being able to
properly review your work and postponing it to 8.6?
That's a hard attitude, but it's not clear for me how to avoid it, and
if as a project there's a better way to face the issue. I've been bitten
with cultural issues before, so if you find this utterly harsh to the
point of being shoked, please accept my excuses, I'm not able to propose
something better on the practical front.
Regards,
--
dim
