On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Greg Stark <st...@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You're
>> essentially leveraging a commit bit that you haven't used in more than
>> three years to try to push a patch that was submitted months too late
> I'm not leveraging anything any I'm not going to push something unless
> people are on board. That's *why* I sent that message. And I started
> the email by saying I was going to go work on patches from the
> commitfest first.

I said that a lot more harshly than I should have, and I impugned you
unfairly.  Sorry.

I'm going to try again:

I don't doubt that your desire to move this patch forward is motivated
by anything under than the best of possible motivations.  However,
whether you intend it or not, trying to move this patch toward a 9.4
commit, or even trying to get people to express an opinion on whether
this is suitable for a 9.4 commit, is inevitably going to cause senior
reviewers who think they might have concerns about it to need to spend
time on it.  Inevitably, that time will come at the expense of patches
that were timely submitted, and that is unfair to the people who
submitted those patches.

Of course, if you want to review this patch now, I'm 100% OK with
that.  If you want to review other pending patches, for 9.4 or 9.5, I
think that's great, too.  But if there's talk of committing this
patch, I think that seems both quite a bit too late (relative to the
timing of CF4) and quite a bit too early (relative to the amount of
review and testing done thus far).


Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

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

Reply via email to