On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 04:21:16PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I, as a non-committer, have proposed that the rules be bent once or > twice in the past, and those suggestions were rejected without > exception, even though I imagined that there was a compelling > cost/benefit ratio. I thought that was fine. I always assumed that I > had the same right to suggest something as a committer. The only > fundamental difference was that I had to convince a committer that my > assessment was correct, rather than simply avoiding having the > suggestion be vetoed. I'd need to do both. Clearly my previous > understanding of this was questionable, to say the least.
Basically, the same rules apply to all commitfests, i.e. a committer can apply anything during that period. I think the only restriction for the last commitfest is that the committer can not apply a new patch that would have been too big to be submitted to the last commitfest. If enough people feel that this committer behavior during the last commitfest is a problem, we can discuss changing that policy. Now, with that right comes the significant responsibility to fix any breakage they cause. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
