Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)

On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> Ned Lilly <ned(at)greatbridge(dot)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 will back up Tom on this and vote against even putting it into /contrib
... the only reason we delayed the release as we did was so that Bruce
could finish up the release docs, not to give "just one more patch" time
to get into the tree.

Tom, apologies ... the Karel issue is the same thing, and I was in err for
even suggesting we put *that* into contrib.