Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Dec 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> >>> As far as the patch itself, I don't think I ever claimed it was ready
> >>> for prime time --- rather, I followed process and it was applied.
> >>
> >> Applying it on the day before we go RC is claiming that it is ready for
> >> prime time. As Jan already told you, the "process" may include applying
> >> patches by default during devel cycle, but it can't work that way in
> >> late beta.
> >
> > OK, so what do we want the process to be?
>
> During Dev Period, Apply whatever comes through if it looks/feels okay
>
> During Beta/Release Cycle, unless you understanding what the patch is
> doing, and how it can affect other aspects of the system, check with
> someone that does before applying ... don't wait for someone to speak out
> against it, but email someone you feel is in the know directly and if you
> don't get a response, assume the patch shouldn't be applied vs should be
> ...
>
> Basically, during Beta/Release, we should almost a policy where a third
> party patch needs to be approved by a second committer *before* being
> applied ... and that even applies to Tom >:) Your own patch, fine ... but
> a third party patch, even submitted by someone who has submitted patch
> previously, should be reviewed/approved by two committers ...
Please find a cure that isn't worse than the disease. I don't have time
to apply patches as it is, let alone check with someone else. You may
notice some of the patches I applied were 2-3 weeks old because I
haven't been able to keep up. Also realize that several people did
comment on the patch before it was added to the queue and it went
through several revisions, so it did get attention.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
