| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| Date: | 2007-10-09 20:44:02 |
| Message-ID: | 470BE812.7020104@hagander.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>>> Can somebody please explain to me what beta means if you can commit new
>>>> stuff after it has been declared?
>>> We allow /contrib to be more lax about beta changes.
>> Why? When people were complaining about not being able to use TSearch
>> because their ISPs wouldn't install contrib modules we couldn't
>> understand why they would think that way. If we are going to be less
>> stringent about /contrib, maybe they were right to cautious.
>
> The idea is /contrib isn't installed by default and it isn't tied into
> the core code, and can be tested easier because it is stand-alone. We
> can rethink that logic but that has been the guide in the past.
I think you just outlined a whole lot of arguments for pgfoundry, and
not for contrib.
//Magnus
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-10-09 20:54:43 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-10-09 20:43:27 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2007-10-09 20:51:24 | Re: some points for FAQ |
| Previous Message | Stefan Kaltenbrunner | 2007-10-09 20:43:27 | Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review |