Re: ECPG bug fix: DECALRE STATEMENT and DEALLOCATE, DESCRIBE

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: ECPG bug fix: DECALRE STATEMENT and DEALLOCATE, DESCRIBE
Date: 2021-08-07 22:31:49
Message-ID: CAH2-Wzk5vCF_k94iuJ_imF60j3=trNqO8xf8Om1KpK5mUyntMg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Aug 7, 2021 at 12:43 PM Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> Again, I didn't know the RMT was expecting anything from me. Yes, I
> knew I needed to spend some time on a technical issues, but that's
> exactly the information I had at the time.

As Andrew mentioned, I sent you an email on the 30th -- a full week
prior to the email that formally timeboxed this open item. That
earlier email is here:

https://postgr.es/m/CAH2-Wzk=QxtSp0H5EKV92EH0u22HVMQLHGwYP4_FA3yTiEi9Yg@mail.gmail.com

I really don't know why you're surprised that the issue came to a head
with yesterday's email. This earlier email was similar in tone, and
yet went completely unanswered for a full week. This situation has
been steadily escalating for quite a while now.

> Please read my prior email completely, I did go into detail about what
> I meant with tone. I don't mind a formal wording and I completely agree
> that a decision has to be made at some point. I was wrong in thinking
> there was more time left, but that's also not the point. The point is
> that you talk *about* me in the third person in an email you address at
> me. It might be normal for you, but in my neck of the woods this is
> very rude behavior.

I also talked about the RMT in the third person. My intent was to make
the message legalistic and impersonal. That's what is driving our
thinking on this -- the charter of the RMT.

The RMT primarily exists to resolve open items that risk holding up
the release. When any committer of any patch simply doesn't respond in
any substantive way to the RMT (any RMT), the RMT is all but forced to
fall back on the crude option of reverting the patch. I cannot imagine
any other outcome if other individuals were involved, or if the
details were varied.

We're all volunteers, just like you. I happen to be a big believer in
our culture of personal ownership and personal responsibility. But you
simply haven't engaged with us at all.

> Where did I say I expect you to wait? How could I even do that given
> that I didn't even know you were waiting for a status update from me?

You didn't say anything at all, which speaks for itself. And makes it
impossible for us to be flexible.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker 2021-08-07 23:13:14 Re: [PATCH] Add tab-complete for backslash commands
Previous Message Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker 2021-08-07 22:25:44 Re: [PATCH] Tab completion for ALTER TABLE … ADD …