On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > I think it's obvious that a committer doesn't need to wait till some > later commitfest to commit patches that have since gotten enough review > or are uncontroversial. Neither is the case here.
Right. I mean, the occasionally-floated notion that committers can't commit things when there's no CommitFest ongoing is obviously flat wrong, as a quick look at the commit log will demonstrate. On the flip side, it's unreasonable to expect that as soon as a committer posts 7000-line patch, everyone who possibly has an objection to that patch will drop everything that they are doing to object to anything they don't like about it. It can easily take a week to review such a patch thoroughly even if you start the minute it hits the list. Many committers, including me, have held off on committing patches for many months to make sure that the community got time to review them, even though nobody explicitly objected. This patch was committed much faster than that and over an explicit objection. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
