Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> My personal opinion is that the community should not undertake a "rewrite" of
> a nontrivial feature after freeze. The fact that a progenitor was present in
> the tree at freeze doesn't make the rewrite much less risky than a brand new
> feature. So, I suggest that you instead revert the patches and review that
> rewrite for next CommitFest. Even so, I am okay with your current plan.
TBH, I think the odds are very good that that's how it will end up being;
my standards for committing a large patch a few days before beta2 are
going to be quite high. But I feel it's only fair to offer Tomas the
chance to get something in this year not next year. Also, even though
this can be expected to be heavily-rewritten code, the fact that there
was a progenitor makes it less risky than a truly new patch would be.
regards, tom lane