Greg Stark wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> > I'm also not prepared to push a large and unstable feature into the tree
> > on the hope that it will get fixed.
>
> I didn't have the impression it had any known problems, Simon and
> others spent a lot of time testing it already. The improvements Heikki
> was asking for were simplifications or cleanup type changes and every
> time he asked for something Simon had it done within a day or two.
>
> The problem is I think this will *always* be a "large unstable
> feature" just because it's large. If we aren't happy having it in the
> tree for alpha releases then there's no circumstance we'll ever be
> happy having it in a real release. I think it's a *lot* better having
> it in the alpha releases when if we find problems we can revert it or
> fix the problems than dropping it at the last second before the betas
> when it has to be perfect and there's no second chances.
By that logic we would never have accepted large patches, but we have,
often.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +