On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote: > On 06/08/2017 08:36 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> I freely admit I encouraged you to commit this. I did not imagine >> that would be followed immediately by abdicating all responsibility >> for it. My mistake, I guess. > > Robert, chill out.
That's probably good advice, but ... > Kevin offered to revert. It's perhaps not the best way > forward - I'm not familiar with the details here - but it's certainly one > way to take responsibility. ... he also proposed to then commit it again for some future release cycle, and what then? Revert it again if it turns out to have any bugs, and commit it a third time in some release cycle after that? It's a big, invasive patch. I don't think we want it going in and out of the tree repeatedly. More generally, I don't think there's ever a time when it's OK to commit a patch that you're not willing to put at least some effort into fixing up afterwards. -- 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
