Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Amen, brother! That would never be tolerated in any commercial setting that I am aware of, and should not be here either, IMNSHO. Silence does not mean consent, it is far more likely to mean that nobody had time to look it over.And if you commit it then surely you own it to some extent.I think it would be reasonable to insist on at least one concurrence ("looks ok to me") posted to pgsql-patches before applying during late beta. We've gotten into a mode where if you like a patch you say nothing, but I wonder whether we shouldn't change that habit.
And your point is what? What suggestion for improvement do you have? Have perfect knowledge of what patches will be bad and don't apply them?
You want me to claim ownership? Of what? Of applying the patch? Everyone already knows that. Of the patch being bad? Everyone already
knows that too? What I shouldn't have applied it? Also known. But
what good does that do us now?
Bruce,
I'm sorry if I offended you.
As for suggestions, elsewhere you wrote:
"Now, if I don't understand the patch, we can change the procedure so I require someone to state it is OK rather than the fallback of quiet acceptance, especially just before a beta or RC version."
Take that as my suggested improvement.
Keep up the good work as always - you know we are grateful for it.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
