Hi Noah,
On 6/8/15 10:13 AM, Noah Misch wrote:
> My condemnation of the pg_audit commits probably hurt you as the feature's
> authors. I am sorry for that. Your code was better than most "Ready for
> Committer" code, and I hope you submit more patches in the future.
I appreciate you saying this and especially for saying it publicly.
I've certainly had quite the experience as a first-time contributor
working on this patch. Perhaps I bit off more than I should have and I
definitely managed to ruffle a few feathers along the way. I learned a
lot about how the community works, both the good and the bad. Fear not,
though, I'm not so easily discouraged and you'll definitely be hearing
more from me.
My honest, albeit novice, opinion is that it was a mistake to pull
pg_audit from contrib. I know more than anyone that it had flaws,
mostly owing to its implementation as an extension, but it also provided
capability that simply does not exist right now. Recent conversations
about PGXN demonstrate why that is not (currently) a good alternative
for distributing extensions. That means pg_audit will have a more
limited audience than it could have had. That's a shame, because people
are interested in pg_audit, warts and all.
The stated purpose of contrib is: "include porting tools, analysis
utilities, and plug-in features that are not part of the core PostgreSQL
system, mainly because they address a limited audience or are too
experimental to be part of the main source tree. This does not preclude
their usefulness."
Perhaps we should consider modifying that language, because from my
perspective pg_audit fit the description perfectly.
Of course, I understand this is a community effort and I don't expect
every contribution to be accepted and committed. Consider me
disappointed yet determined.
--
- David Steele
david@pgmasters.net