Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management

From: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management
Date: 2009-12-09 02:47:10
Message-ID: 4B1F0FAE.60008@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Takahiro Itagaki wrote:
> Can I ask the final decision whether the YAML formatter should be
> applied or rejected? As far as I read the discussion, we can apply it
> because serveral users want it and we don't have a plan to support
> extensible formatters in the core.
>
The path I thought made sense at this point was to mark the patch ready
for a committer, since it sounds like everyone is done with it now, and
have another committer besides yourself do a final review as part of
that. At this point, I think we've justified the feature and confirmed
the feature works. Given the controversy, I think another set of eyes
to make sure it's not going to be a maintenance headache moving forward
should (as usual) have the final say on whether the code goes in or not,
because that's only drawback to it left to committing it I see at this
point.

To be clear about which version we're talking about:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20091130123456.4A03.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp
is the candidate for commit that includes the cleanup you've already done.

--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2009-12-09 02:59:35 Re: [PATCH] Windows x64 [repost]
Previous Message Robert Haas 2009-12-09 02:45:25 Re: bug: fuzzystrmatch levenshtein is wrong