Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
Date: 2000-11-02 21:33:40
Message-ID: 200011022133.QAA23463@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackers
> Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)com> writes:
> > Well, here in relatively minor form is the First Example of a Great 
> > Bridge Priority (which Tom, Bruce, and Jan have all predicted would 
> > come... ;-)
> 
> Hmm.  I wasn't aware that Jan had done it at Great Bridge's request,
> and I am going to make a point of not letting that affect my opinion ;-).
> 
> What really got my ire up was that this change was committed several
> days *after* core had agreed that 7.0.3 was frozen and ready to go except
> for updating the changelog, and that it was committed with no prior
> notice or discussion.  The fact that GB asked for it doesn't make that
> better; if anything it makes it worse.  We wouldn't have accepted such
> a patch at this late date from an outside contributor, I believe.
> Jan should surely have known better than to handle it in this fashion.
> 
> Need I remind you, also, that GB has been bugging us for several weeks
> to get 7.0.3 released ASAP?  Last-minute changes don't further that
> goal.
> 
> The early returns from pghackers seem to be that people favor just
> dropping the script into /contrib and not worrying about how well
> tested/documented it is.  If that's the consensus then I'll shut up
> ... but I do *not* like the way this was handled.

I totally agree with Tom on all his points.  If people were worried we
would not be objective now that we are employed by GB, they can rest
easy.

Also, seems like it is hidden enough in /contrib for it to stay.  While
I would not have added it myself, I do not feel strongly enough to
remove Jan's commit.  However, I am not going to mention it in the 7.0.3
release notes.

I want it removed from 7.1 /contrib.  I will do that now myself.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Rob S.Date: 2000-11-02 21:47:21
Subject: RE: Another remove request
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-02 21:26:27
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-02 21:49:14
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2000-11-02 21:26:27
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group