Re: RLS feature has been committed

On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 12:38 AM, David G Johnston
<david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm of a mind to agree that this shouldn't have been committed...but I'm not
> seeing where Stephen has done sufficient wrong to justify crucifixion.
> Especially since everything is being done publicly and you are one of the
> many people in the position to flex a veto by reverting the patch.

I'd be interested to see what the reaction would be if I reverted this
patch out of the blue. I suspect it would not be positive. More
generally, I don't want the PostgreSQL source code repository to
ground zero for a revert war.

> Subsequent, possibly private, discussion between you and Stephen could then
> occur before making any conclusions you form public so that others can learn
> from the experience and ponder whether anything could be changed to mitigate
> such situations in the future.

I'd be happy to discuss this with Stephen, either in person, by phone,
or over public or private email. Unfortunately, although he's posted
many other emails to this list over the last couple of days, he hasn't
chosen to respond, publicly or privately, to my statement that he must
have read the email in which I asked him to hold off committing
(because he addressed technical feedback from that same email) and
that he went ahead and did it anyway.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company