From: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com
Organization: Aglio Database Solutions
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 12:07:38 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.8
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <5364.1157125854@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <5364.1157125854@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200609011207.38628.josh@agliodbs.com>

Tom,

> September is upon us and it doesn't seem like we are ready to ship
> a beta.  I think it's time to start making some hard choices.
>
> In the main code I see these outstanding features/patches:
>
> * bitmap indexes
> * updatable views
> * GUC variable reload + refactoring (previously applied and reverted)
> * plpython improvements (needs review by someone who knows plpython)
> * plpgsql improvements for returning record types
> * patch to build on VC

What's VC?

> * make libpq default client_encoding setting from locale?
>
> In contrib we've got:
>
> * new ISBN/etc module
> * hstore (finally proposed for inclusion)
> * new sslinfo module
> * pgstattuple changes
> * removing the deadwood

This is just a delete.  I've fixed the pgFoundry permissions issues and 
will be loading the last CVS snapshot today.  At that point, Bruce can 
delete stuff.

Can you be a little clearer on which things are non-working patches, and 
which things are pending due to lack of review?   I'm all for bouncing 
stuff that's not ready to go, but bouncing stuff because we haven't 
recruited enough code reviewers is just bad practice.

-- 
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco