On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 18:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 19:50 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> Log Message:
> >> -----------
> >> Some copy-editing of the Hot Standby documentation.
> >>
> >> Thanks to Joshua Tolley for the review.
> >
> > I rejected these changes. Please revoke.
>
> Do you have the ability to unilaterally reject changes of which others approve?
Other(s)?? You mean your unilateral approval of your own work?
You should not commit if you do not have consensus.
There was no strong approval, though I expressed clearly my strong
disapproval. Regrettably, I found your changes added almost nothing and
were in many ways questionable.
> I think it's not very helpful to be trying to reject changes that
> people (yes, including me) take the time to make to the Hot Standby
> documentation. The tone and style of that page do not match the tone
> and style of other parts of our documentation, and frankly I think it
> needs a lot more work than what I just did. If every word that gets
> moved is going to turn into an argument, then no one will be willing
> to take the time to make any improvements at all, and I don't think
> that's good for the project.
So therefore we should accept everything *you* do in case there is a
fight? Perhaps you will agree to accept everything other people do as
well to encourage improvement? I don't really believe you want your
comments to be applied back to you, do you?
There is currently much documentation missing, especially around
Streaming Rep. It would be much better to spend your time adding that
than to contrive fights over changes that people disagreed with.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
