MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAFj8pRArtw+Qqzk+Zf2NxjgO=paCBdc54eEma+MsVwtx3j7Atg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFj8pRAK_8ym1J=SAdin-vtL0PAachXgjWgU3QrhzinRdBX2sw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFj8pRAx-Gb9Ux825cxGNm38qQUOrij1GY6erPRaQ=cpqfiX7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFj8pRCEjG005L=1vGbir-odYdcYxByOAeFVJ_K9eRcRF=MbNQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <aCyYHXhAjXOUPvLO@momjian.us>
 <CAB-JLwY2-Hm_SYbj2td_VKuU8awCwgDr-sOtjHRE2C-Sgg_pFg@mail.gmail.com>
 <aCywNzDx2J3jrY1-@momjian.us> <41D2EE98-224D-4B43-9F8B-127525A99CD7@yesql.se>
 <aCzl0SQYGTBJfdtY@momjian.us>
 <138d50cd8d9617469922eb0017956a3610089064.camel@cybertec.at>
 <aCzu84eWXnXPvFmf@momjian.us>
 <7847377f86ea938f4dec068e43eb77a6d0bfc520.camel@cybertec.at>
In-Reply-To: <7847377f86ea938f4dec068e43eb77a6d0bfc520.camel@cybertec.at>
From: Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 08:36:45 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAFj8pRBNQCycGvGjxKumEgKL+Dqxm8QXY-v0xhBVm+0T3Snbgg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: proposal: schema variables
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>,
	Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>, jian he <jian.universality@gmail.com>,
	Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>,
	Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
	DUVAL REMI <REMI.DUVAL@cheops.fr>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002a946106359f998a"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRBNQCycGvGjxKumEgKL%2BDqxm8QXY-v0xhBVm%2B0T3Snbgg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

--0000000000002a946106359f998a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

st 21. 5. 2025 v 8:27 odes=C3=ADlatel Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.a=
t>
napsal:

> On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 17:06 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > f no committer intends to pick it up and commit it, I think the proper
> > > action would be to step up and reject the patch set, not complain
> about the
> > > insistence of the author.
> >
> > Are you saying I should not complain until we have officially rejected
> > the patch set?  If we officially reject it, the patch author would no
> > longer post it?
>
> No, you are free to complain, just as Pavel is free to keep his patch
> set from rotting.  What I am trying to say is that rejecting the patch
> set is the most effective way to complain.
>
> The current state is that Pavel keeps the patch set alive, and occasional=
ly
> people review it or parts of it.  But no committer is accepting or
> rejecting
> it, so the patch set remains in limbo.  This annoys you, and it is
> certainly
> not a happy experience for the author.  Rejection is not nice, but at lea=
st
> it would make it easier for Pavel to move on and spend his energy
> elsewhere.
>

Rejection is not nice, but it can be, and if it will be, I hope, there will
be more cleaner
status if we want this feature or not, and if possibly want this feature,
what we expect.

This feature can be designed differently in respect to some priorities. But
without known
priorities, any patch, proposal can end in the same state.

Regards

Pavel


>
> Yours,
> Laurenz Albe
>

--0000000000002a946106359f998a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote g=
mail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">st 21. 5. 2025 =
v=C2=A08:27 odes=C3=ADlatel Laurenz Albe &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:laurenz.albe=
@cybertec.at">laurenz.albe@cybertec.at</a>&gt; napsal:<br></div><blockquote=
 class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px so=
lid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 17:06 -0400, B=
ruce Momjian wrote:<br>
&gt; f no committer intends to pick it up and commit it, I think the proper=
<br>
&gt; &gt; action would be to step up and reject the patch set, not complain=
 about the<br>
&gt; &gt; insistence of the author.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Are you saying I should not complain until we have officially rejected=
<br>
&gt; the patch set?=C2=A0 If we officially reject it, the patch author woul=
d no<br>
&gt; longer post it?<br>
<br>
No, you are free to complain, just as Pavel is free to keep his patch<br>
set from rotting.=C2=A0 What I am trying to say is that rejecting the patch=
<br>
set is the most effective way to complain.<br>
<br>
The current state is that Pavel keeps the patch set alive, and occasionally=
<br>
people review it or parts of it.=C2=A0 But no committer is accepting or rej=
ecting<br>
it, so the patch set remains in limbo.=C2=A0 This annoys you, and it is cer=
tainly<br>
not a happy experience for the author.=C2=A0 Rejection is not nice, but at =
least<br>
it would make it easier for Pavel to move on and spend his energy elsewhere=
.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Rejection is not nice, but it can be,=
 and if it will be, I hope, there will be more cleaner</div><div>status if =
we want this feature or not, and if possibly want this feature, what we exp=
ect.</div><div><br></div><div>This feature can be designed differently in r=
espect to some priorities. But without known</div><div>priorities, any patc=
h, proposal can end in the same state.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards</di=
v><div><br></div><div>Pavel</div><div><br></div><div>=C2=A0<br></div><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1=
px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Yours,<br>
Laurenz Albe<br>
</blockquote></div></div>

--0000000000002a946106359f998a--