Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management
Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-12-09T02:47:10Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Takahiro Itagaki wrote: > Can I ask the final decision whether the YAML formatter should be > applied or rejected? As far as I read the discussion, we can apply it > because serveral users want it and we don't have a plan to support > extensible formatters in the core. > The path I thought made sense at this point was to mark the patch ready for a committer, since it sounds like everyone is done with it now, and have another committer besides yourself do a final review as part of that. At this point, I think we've justified the feature and confirmed the feature works. Given the controversy, I think another set of eyes to make sure it's not going to be a maintenance headache moving forward should (as usual) have the final say on whether the code goes in or not, because that's only drawback to it left to committing it I see at this point. To be clear about which version we're talking about: http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20091130123456.4A03.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp is the candidate for commit that includes the cleanup you've already done. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com