| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL odbc list <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] 6.2 protocol |
| Date: | 2001-02-12 01:57:44 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.31.0102112156170.54632-100000@thelab.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > I think Hiroshi's complaint was that it should be discussed more.
> > > > Seems we have discussed it, and most agree on the removal.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm I think you are not walking a proper 'discussion first'
> > > process in the first place. You committed the removal 7 hours
> > > after you had posted the first mail of this thread.
> > > Is it sufficient ?
> >
> > Nope, a *discussion* should go for *at least* 24 hrs after the first post
> > in the discussion ... then again, similar rules should apply before
> > applying any patches in the first place ... *roll eyes*
>
> Removal seemed to obvious to discuss, I guess, and when I got on OK, I
> was on my way.
Since you obvious had to have had some sort of discussion and approval
(especially after all that you and I have discussed) for the original
patch, a similar discussion and approval should have been attained for
removing it ... someone had to have liked the original patch to have given
you the go-ahead on it, right?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-02-12 02:02:57 | Re: RE: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] 6.2 protocol |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-02-12 01:55:59 | Re: RE: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] 6.2 protocol |