Re: Recovery Test Framework

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:04 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Well, one of the things that makes me uncomfortable is that it's not
> even clear exactly which set of patches is currently proposed for
> inclusion. We've seen a whole lot of URLs fly back and forth, many
> of them pointing at pages that aren't there a few days later.
> I've been too busy with non-replication-related patches to pay really
> close attention, but I certainly don't get the impression that there's
> a stable set of patches waiting to be applied.

See this is one of the things which bothers me. I don't see any
advantage in forcing Simon to stop making improvements -- and there
are always improvements to be made -- just to make his code seem more
stable.

Obviously we want to avoid having people actively stepping on each
others' toes, but as long as the code isn't actively being worked on
by anyone else by it would be silly to ask Simon to just sit on his
hands when he sees further things that can be done.

--
greg