Robert Haas wrote:
> This might be my fault, so I apologize for killing your enthusiasm. I
> think when I get wrapped up in a CommitFest (and especially during the
> second half) I get wound up in determining whether or not things are
> going to get applied and tend to give short shrift to thinks that seem
> like they won't. My bad.
> Generally speaking, I am always in favor of adding things to the
> CommitFest, but I guess the one exception I would make is if there are
> outstanding comments already given that haven't been addressed yet.
> In that case it seems a little unfair to ask people to review it
> further unless there are very specific questions you need answered. I
> think you were good about communicating that the patch wasn't ready to
> be applied yet, but I also think that it's to be expected that you'll
> get less feedback while it's in that state.
Yeah, makes sense, altho perhaps there needs to be a way to get
incremental progress reviewed?
> Anyway, my apologies for turning you off to the process... that wasn't
> my intent and I'm sorry that it had that effect.
I think there was a level of confusion on both sides, especially with a
newish process for me to get my head around, so no apology needed at all
as it is/was clear that there was no intent on your part to make things
hard! (that is why I said nothing at the time). But thank you for your
kind words, much appreciated.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Greg Smith||Date: 2010-02-28 06:07:20|
|Subject: Re: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication
|Previous:||From: Gokulakannan Somasundaram||Date: 2010-02-28 06:02:23|
|Subject: Re: A thought on Index Organized Tables|