Message-ID: <4AD7D6AC.7090009@ak.jp.nec.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:13:00 +0900
From: KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, kaigai@kaigai.gr.jp
Subject: Re: Reworks for Access Control facilities (r2363)
References: <4AC5A14F.6050306@ak.jp.nec.com>	
	<20091012024604.GW17756@tamriel.snowman.net>	
	<4AD54082.9050001@ak.jp.nec.com> <10495.1255627322@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<603c8f070910151856g51a97adcv19bfb26f303fea89@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <603c8f070910151856g51a97adcv19bfb26f303fea89@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Maybe if I weren't burned out after a month of CommitFesting, I could
>> muster a more positive reaction, but right now I just can't summon any
>> enthusiasm for this.
> 
> Based on this review, I am marking this patch Rejected.

Basically, I need to agree in spite of Stephen's efforts.

> For what it's worth, I took a quick look at this just to see if I had
> any reason to disagree with your conclusions.  I don't.

Sorry, please make clear the "your conclusions"?

Does it mean that Tom's comment that this reworking does not go into
the right direction? Or, my comment on the last message?

Thanks,
-- 
OSS Platform Development Division, NEC
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@ak.jp.nec.com>