On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 11:54:07AM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 02:20:52PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes:
> > >>> Actually, my takeaway from this was "don't ever use git reset on
> > >>> the repo".
> >
> > > That's actually not tenable. If we ever find something in our
> > > repo that we don't have full rights to, especially if it's
> > > something that would put roadblocks in front of people who'd like
> > > to make a proprietary fork, we have to be able to expunge it, not
> > > merely paper it over.
> >
> > What, and re-do every commit after the one that added such material?
> > And somehow find every tarball that was shipped with the material,
> > and make them go away? Please don't bring straw-man arguments.
>
> It might sound like a straw man if we hadn't already done this once.
>
> > >> Except for like Andres says, always check *everything* before
> > >> pushing. I know I always push with -n and then do a git show on that
> > >> resulting set of commits just to make sure it's the one I want. It
> > >> doesn't take a lot of extra time after each commit, and it easily
> > >> finds things like this.
> >
> > > Do we see a point in the future where all pushes to that repo
> > > require a reviewer separate from the author? The cost in hassle
> > > and aggravation is, to put it mildly, non-trivial, but it makes
> > > these kinds of mistakes a lot harder to make.
> >
> > No amount of review will prevent human error at the point of the
> > final push.
>
> I suggest that it would.
ETOOLITTLECOFFEE
I do *not* suggest it would.
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
