On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:32 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> I think that Greg's choice of words was a little imprudent, but must
> be viewed in the context of an offline discussion during the hall
> track of pgConf NYC. Clearly Greg wasn't about to go off and
> unilaterally commit this. FWIW, I think I put him off the idea a few
> hours after he made those remarks, without intending for what I'd said
> to have that specific effect (or the opposite effect).
It was somewhere between your two interpretations. I intend to review
everything I can from the commitfest and then this patch and if this
patch is ready for commit before feature freeze I was saying I would
go ahead and commit it. That would only happen if there was a pretty
solid consensus that the my review was good and the patch was good of
course.
The point of the commit fest is to ensure that all patches get
attention. That's why I would only look at this after I've reviewed
anything else from the commitfest that I feel up to reviewing. But if
I have indeed done so there's no point in not taking other patches as
well up to feature freeze. I don't have any intention of lowering our
review standards of course.
So let's table this discussion until the hypothetical case of me doing
lots of reviews *and* reviewing this patch *and* that review being
positive and decisive enough to commit after one review cycle.
--
greg