Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vince Vielhaber
Subject Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSF.4.30.0011022012520.30312-100000@paprika.michvhf.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)  (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>)
Responses Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, The Hermit Hacker wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > > Ned Lilly <ned@greatbridge.com> writes:
> > > > Well, here in relatively minor form is the First Example of a Great
> > > > Bridge Priority (which Tom, Bruce, and Jan have all predicted would
> > > > come... ;-)
> > >
> > > Hmm.  I wasn't aware that Jan had done it at Great Bridge's request,
> > > and I am going to make a point of not letting that affect my opinion ;-).
> > >
> > > What really got my ire up was that this change was committed several
> > > days *after* core had agreed that 7.0.3 was frozen and ready to go except
> > > for updating the changelog, and that it was committed with no prior
> > > notice or discussion.  The fact that GB asked for it doesn't make that
> > > better; if anything it makes it worse.  We wouldn't have accepted such
> > > a patch at this late date from an outside contributor, I believe.
> > > Jan should surely have known better than to handle it in this fashion.
> > >
> > > Need I remind you, also, that GB has been bugging us for several weeks
> > > to get 7.0.3 released ASAP?  Last-minute changes don't further that
> > > goal.
> > >
> > > The early returns from pghackers seem to be that people favor just
> > > dropping the script into /contrib and not worrying about how well
> > > tested/documented it is.  If that's the consensus then I'll shut up
> > > ... but I do *not* like the way this was handled.
> >
> > I totally agree with Tom on all his points.  If people were worried we
> > would not be objective now that we are employed by GB, they can rest
> > easy.
> >
> > Also, seems like it is hidden enough in /contrib for it to stay.  While
> > I would not have added it myself, I do not feel strongly enough to
> > remove Jan's commit.  However, I am not going to mention it in the 7.0.3
> > release notes.
>
> I do feel strongly about this ... 7.0.3 was considered in a release state
> *before* it was committed, pending your docs changes ... personally, if we
> leave this in contrib, my vote is to hold off the release a suitable
> amount of time for testing purposes ... Jan has added a new feature that
> nobody had any pre-warning about, not even other developers in the same
> company as he is in ... not a good precedent :(

What am I missing?   We're talking about contrib.  Most things you find
in contrib directories don't even work and you're worried about a testing
phase?   Most folks don't even look in contrib directories unless they're
specifically looking for something.

Vince.
-- 
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH    email: vev@michvhf.com    http://www.pop4.net128K ISDN from $22.00/mo - 56K Dialup from
$16.00/moat Pop4 Networking       Online Campground Directory    http://www.camping-usa.com      Online Giftshop
Superstore   http://www.cloudninegifts.com
 
==========================================================================





pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vince Vielhaber
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1