On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> This patch has been pushed in a clear violation of established policy.
>
> Fundamental pieces of the patch have changed *after* the commitfest
> started. And there wasn't a recent patch in the commitfest either - the
> entry was moved over from the last round without a new patch. It didn't
> receive independent review (Robert explicitly said his wasn't a full
> review). It wasn't marked ready for committer. The intention to commit
> wasn't announced publically. There were *clear* and unaddressed
> objections to committing the patch as is, by a committer (Robert)
> nonetheless.
I have no reason to doubt your version of events here (although
Stephen may wish to address what you've said - I'm basing that on his
tone elsewhere). I must ask, though: what do you propose to do about
it in this instance? He has been chastised. Would you like to make a
point of formalizing what are (if I'm not mistaken) currently defacto
rules? Should RLS be reverted, and revisited in a future CF?
--
Peter Geoghegan
