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 not > 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. > At this point my hindsight says a strictly declaratory statement of "reasons > 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. > 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. > If your not willing to go to that extent then, unless you know > Stephen personally, I'd not assume that public flogging is the best way to > get him to not mess up in the future; but the honest and cordial dialog > about cause/effect is likely to be more productive and less > self-destructing. Though, to each their own style. All the people involved know Stephen personally. There's also no "public flogging". Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, 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
