On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 30.01.2012 17:18, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> I asked clearly and specifically for you to hold back committing >> anything. Not sure why you would ignore that and commit without >> actually asking myself or Peter. On a point of principle alone, I >> think you should revert. Working together is difficult if >> communication channels are openly ignored and disregarded. > > > You must be referring to this: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-01/msg01406.php > > What I committed in the end was quite different from the version that was in > reply to, too. If you have a specific objection to the patch as committed, > please let me know. I said "There is much yet to discuss so please don't think about committing anything yet." There's not really any way you could misinterpret them. >> Peter and I have been working on a new version that seems likely to >> improve performance over your suggestions. We should be showing >> something soon. > > > Please post those ideas, and let's discuss them. If it's something simple, > maybe we can still sneak them into this release. Otherwise, let's focus on > the existing patches that are pending review or commit. If you really did want to discuss it, it would have taken you 5 minutes to check whether there was consensus on the patch before committing it. Your actions betray the opposite of a willingness to discuss anything. Yes, I'd like to discuss ideas, not just ram home a half-discussed and half-finished patch that happens to do things the way you personally prefer, overriding all inputs. Especially when you know we're working on another version. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
