On 07/14/2016 07:45 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> On 07/14/2016 07:11 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>> There is a pending patch that obsoletes the patches by the vendors. That
>> patch needs more comments (approval/rejection) before this is applied.
>
> I pointed out that the current layout came about as a result of a lot
> of experimentation etc. You have done nothing that I've seen to show
Which is why the changes I made are very conservative and in fact don't
change the organization of the pages in any way. The only thing I did
was now take into account that we (.Org) have more than one installer to
promote.
> that your alternative patch would not cause a regression in what that
> work achieved, and thus I strongly object to such changes. Others I've
> spoken irl had similar concerns.
Then let them speak here.
Dave, instead of just saying , "I strongly object" why not provide some
specific and constructive feedback? That would allow us to build a patch
that will satisfy the community and provide a compromise for our
external vendors that is neutral and fair?
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.