Re: segfault in HEAD when too many nested functions call

On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> wrote:
> Your colleagues achieve compliance despite uncertainty; for inspiration, I
> recommend examining Alvaro's status updates as examples of this. The policy
> currently governs your open items even if you disagree with it.

I emphatically agree with that. If the RMT is to accomplish its
purpose, it must be able to exert authority even when an individual
contributor doesn't like the decisions it makes.

On the other hand, nothing in the open item policy the current RMT has
adopted prohibits you from using judgement about when and how
vigorously to enforce that policy in any particular case, and I would
encourage you to do so. It didn't make much sense to keep sending
Kevin increasingly strident form letters about each individual item
when he wasn't responding to any emails at all, and it makes equally
little sense to me to nag someone over a technical failure to include
a date when things are obviously progressing adequately. As Andres
quite rightly says downthread:

> That's just process over substance.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company