On 05/03/2016 07:12 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
As its committer, I tend to agree about reverting that feature.  Craig
was just posting some more patches, and I have the pg_recvlogical
changes here (--endpos) which after some testing are not quite looking
ready to go -- plus we still have to write the actual Perl test scripts
that would use it.  Taken together, this is now looking to me a bit
rushed, so I prefer to cut my losses here and revert the patch so that
we can revisit it for 9.7.


I think it's a positive development that we can take this attitude to
reverting patches. It should not be seen as a big personal failure,
because it isn't. Stigmatizing reverts incentivizes behavior that
leads to bad outcomes.


Absolutely +1

--
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


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

Reply via email to