Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
От | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.21.0011022035140.494-100000@thelab.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh) (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh) Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Ned Lilly <ned@greatbridge.com> writes: > > > Well, here in relatively minor form is the First Example of a Great > > > Bridge Priority (which Tom, Bruce, and Jan have all predicted would > > > come... ;-) > > > > Hmm. I wasn't aware that Jan had done it at Great Bridge's request, > > and I am going to make a point of not letting that affect my opinion ;-). > > > > What really got my ire up was that this change was committed several > > days *after* core had agreed that 7.0.3 was frozen and ready to go except > > for updating the changelog, and that it was committed with no prior > > notice or discussion. The fact that GB asked for it doesn't make that > > better; if anything it makes it worse. We wouldn't have accepted such > > a patch at this late date from an outside contributor, I believe. > > Jan should surely have known better than to handle it in this fashion. > > > > Need I remind you, also, that GB has been bugging us for several weeks > > to get 7.0.3 released ASAP? Last-minute changes don't further that > > goal. > > > > The early returns from pghackers seem to be that people favor just > > dropping the script into /contrib and not worrying about how well > > tested/documented it is. If that's the consensus then I'll shut up > > ... but I do *not* like the way this was handled. > > I totally agree with Tom on all his points. If people were worried we > would not be objective now that we are employed by GB, they can rest > easy. > > Also, seems like it is hidden enough in /contrib for it to stay. While > I would not have added it myself, I do not feel strongly enough to > remove Jan's commit. However, I am not going to mention it in the 7.0.3 > release notes. I do feel strongly about this ... 7.0.3 was considered in a release state *before* it was committed, pending your docs changes ... personally, if we leave this in contrib, my vote is to hold off the release a suitable amount of time for testing purposes ... Jan has added a new feature that nobody had any pre-warning about, not even other developers in the same company as he is in ... not a good precedent :(
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: