On Nov 15, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So I'm in favor of committing part of the HS code even if there are
>> known failure conditions, as long as those conditions are well-defined.
>
> If we're thinking of committing something that is known broken, I would
> want to have a clearly defined and trust-inspiring escape strategy.
> "We can always revert the patch later" inspires absolutely zero
> confidence here, because in a patch this large there are always going to
> be overlaps with other later patches. If it gets to be February and HS
> is still unshippable, reverting is going to be a tricky and risky
> affair.
>
> I agree with Heikki that it would be better not to commit as long as
> any clear showstoppers remain unresolved.
If ever there were an argument for topic branches, *this is it*.
Best,
David
