Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 04:21:16PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I, as a non-committer, have proposed that the rules be bent once or
> twice in the past, and those suggestions were rejected without
> exception, even though I imagined that there was a compelling
> cost/benefit ratio. I thought that was fine. I always assumed that I
> had the same right to suggest something as a committer. The only
> fundamental difference was that I had to convince a committer that my
> assessment was correct, rather than simply avoiding having the
> suggestion be vetoed. I'd need to do both. Clearly my previous
> understanding of this was questionable, to say the least.

Basically, the same rules apply to all commitfests, i.e. a committer can
apply anything during that period.  I think the only restriction for the
last commitfest is that the committer can not apply a new patch that
would have been too big to be submitted to the last commitfest. If
enough people feel that this committer behavior during the last
commitfest is a problem, we can discuss changing that policy.

Now, with that right comes the significant responsibility to fix any
breakage they cause.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + Everyone has their own god. +