Subject: Feature freeze timezone change request

From: Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 00:07:29 +0100

I was notified that the tentative feature freeze timestamp is on the
wiki[1] as: April 8, 2026 0:00 UTC-12

I request that the final feature freeze timestamp be set to 0:00 UTC,
not 0:00 UTC-12. The comitfest app currently only supports dates as
the start/end of a commitfest, not datetimes. By using 0:00 UTC I (or
anyone else with admin access) can simply fill in the last day of the
commitfest, and the commitfest will be automatically closed when that
day ends in UTC.

PS. I love that we're not using AoE anymore[2]

[1]: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_19_Open_Items
[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/Z_U0fUvVkXOZmRVV%40momjian.us

---

From: Robert Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 19:17:38 -0400

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 7:07 PM Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email-masked]> wrote:
> not 0:00 UTC-12.

+1.

> The comitfest app currently only supports dates as

But not for this reason. It would be fine if the CF app closed the CF
twelve hours before or after the actual feature freeze. But using UTC
for everything is way less confusing, IMHO.

> PS. I love that we're not using AoE anymore[2]

+1

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

---

From: Robert Haas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 22:25:33 -0400

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 8:40 PM Tom Lane <[email-masked]> wrote:
> What we've been using lately for release freezes is noon UTC, which
> personally I'd prefer on the grounds that it's not as confusing
> which day is meant.

Hmm, I kind of like that idea. I don't care that much in the end. But
less confusing is better.

---

From: Peter Eisentraut <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 10:48:36 +0100

> commitfest, and the commitfest will be automatically closed when that

I don't think the end of the commitfest and feature freeze need to be 
the same thing.  The commitfest might as well end on 31 March or 1 April.

---

From: Jelte Fennema-Nio <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 13:28:07 +0100

> the same thing.  The commitfest might as well end on 31 March or 1 April.

I think it's fine for the feature freeze to end at a 12:00 UTC instead
of 0:00 UTC. But I think the commitfest should end after the feature
freeze, not before. Otherwise patches will show up as committed in
PG20-1 when in fact they are part of the PG19 release.

---

From: Andrew Dunstan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 11:07:27 -0400

> PG20-1 when in fact they are part of the PG19 release.

Sure, close it on the 9th some time.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

---

From: Nathan Bossart <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 10:14:05 -0500

> less confusing is better.

+1 for April 8th, 12:00 UTC.

-- 
nathan

---

From: Jacob Champion <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 08:37:11 -0700

On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 5:41 PM Tom Lane <[email-masked]> wrote:
> I think the UTC-12 business is left over from when we defined it as
> AoE, but we're not doing that anymore because it's too confusing.

Yeah -- I swapped it recently because I noticed it was still labeled
AoE, and I didn't want anyone to have to rediscover last year's
thread. It wasn't really meant to be an endorsement for UTC-12.

> personally I'd prefer on the grounds that it's not as confusing

+1 for 12:00 UTC.

--Jacob

---

From: Joe Conway <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 12:08:18 -0400

>> personally I'd prefer on the grounds that it's not as confusing

+1 seems reasonable and not likely to be misunderstood

-- 
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

---

From: Nathan Bossart <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 13:58:51 -0500

> +1 seems reasonable and not likely to be misunderstood

I updated the wiki page.  Shall we also remove the "(tentative)"?

-- 
nathan

---

From: Jacob Champion <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2026 12:06:09 -0700

On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 12:03 PM Tom Lane <[email-masked]> wrote:
> BTW, there is some weird caching issue with that page: I did not see
> the up-to-date version, even after multiple refreshes.  It wasn't
> till I noticed I wasn't logged into the wiki and corrected that
> that I saw your edit.

I've noticed that with other pages, but I assumed it was
intentional/robot-related.

--Jacob