On 8 October 2012 21:35, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey, if me deciding I don't want to work on a patch any more is going
> to make you feel slighted, then you're out of luck.  The archives are
> littered with people who have decided to stop working on things
> because the consensus position on list was different than the approach
> that they personally favored, and I have as much right to do that as
> anyone else.

Sure you do. However, I doubt very many of those who gave up did so
over so trivial an issue as to how to grow a buffer somewhere, and
those that did usually did not go on to become major contributors, and
certainly not committers. The buffer thing is, as far as I know, the
single solitary point of contention with this patch. We're talking
about 2 lines of code. To give up now is just petulant. There is no
other way of looking at it.

> It is not as if anyone has phrased this as a maybe-we-should
> sort of argument; there have been quite definite arguments on both
> sides over apparently strongly-held positions.  I had hoped that this
> was going to be a quick and non-controversial win, but 74 email
> messages later it has become clear that it will be neither of those
> things.

Many of those 74 emails concerned my completely unrelated digression
into exploiting strxfrm(); we spent a ridiculously long time
discussing how to size this buffer, but it still wasn't anything like
74 messages.

Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to