Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Devrim G?ND?Z wrote:
> > What we should to do is to prevent such things happening in the future,
> > rather than reverting this patch and delaying replication issues.
> >
> >
> >
>
> The next time the same sort of argument will be made. The way to prevent
> it in future is not to allow it now.
>
> One of the things that people seem to fail to appreciate is that it
> really looks very bad for us when an insider does this. The message we
> send to non-insiders is just dreadful. If we want to encourage people to
> participate in development then we should all play by the same rules.
> One of the things I have found most attractive about the PostgreSQL
> community, quite apart from the technical excellence of our product, is
> the community's openness, fairness and egalitarianism. And I know I'm
> not alone in that. We should guard those qualities jealously.

Andrew is right that the appearance here is the biggest problem, and I
already emailed that to Jan privately.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +