On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com>
> On 2014-09-22 21:38:17 -0700, David G Johnston wrote:
> > Robert Haas wrote
> > > It's difficult to imagine a more flagrant violation of process than
> > > committing a patch without any warning and without even *commenting*
> > > on the fact that clear objections to commit were made on a public
> > > mailing list. If that is allowed to stand, what can we assume other
> > > than that Stephen, at least, has a blank check to change anything he
> > > wants, any time he wants, with no veto possible from anyone else?
> > I'm of a mind to agree that this shouldn't have been committed...but I'm
> > seeing where Stephen has done sufficient wrong to justify crucifixion.
> I've not seen much in the way of 'crucifixion' before this email. And I
> explicitly *don't* think it's warranted. Also it's not happening.
I maybe got a little carried away with my hyperbole...
> > At this point my hindsight says a strictly declaratory statement of
> > this is not ready" combined with reverting the patch would have been
> > sufficient; or even just a "I am going to revert this for these reasons"
> > post. The difference between building support for a revert and
> gathering a
> > mob is a pretty thin line.
> The reason it's being discussed is to find a way to align the different
> views about when to commit stuff. The primary goal is *not* to revert
> the commit or anything but to make sure we're not slipping into
> procedures we all would regret. Which *really* can happen very
> easily. We're all humans and most of us have more than enough to do.
So, the second option then...and I'm sorry but "this should never have
been committed" tends to cause one to think it should therefore be reverted.
> > Though I guess if you indeed feel that his actions were truly heinous you
> > should also then put forth the proposal that his ability to commit be
> > revoked.
> I think *you* are escalating this to something unwarranted here by the
> way you're painting the discussion.
Not everyone who reads -hackers knows all the people involved personally.
I had an initial reaction to these e-mails that I thought I would share,
nothing more. I'm not going to quote the different comments that led me to
my feeling that the response to this was disproportionate to the offense
but after a first pass - which is all many people would do - that is what I
came away with. Though you could say I fell into the very same trap by
reacting off my first impression...