From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Custom variable class segmentation fault |
Date: | 2006-08-13 23:47:12 |
Message-ID: | 44DFBA00.20604@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I've always found it easier to review uncommitted patches than committed
> ones anyway. When you're playing catch-up by reviewing a committed
> patch, you have to deal with three states of the code rather than two
> (pre-patch, post-patch, your own mods). That gets rapidly worse if the
> patch has been in there awhile and other changes go in on top of it.
> Plus, once other changes accumulate on top, it becomes extremely painful
> to revert if the conclusion is that the patch is completely broken.
> (A conclusion that I don't think is at all unlikely with respect to
> this patch.)
>
>
>
Easy or not this strikes me as good policy. And nothing is urgent quite
yet - we still have another 18 days to the end of the month, which is
the stated deadline for getting patches reviewed and committed.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-14 00:02:42 | Re: [PATCHES] Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-08-13 23:37:13 | Re: [PATCHES] Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2006-08-14 00:02:42 | Re: [PATCHES] Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-08-13 23:37:13 | Re: [PATCHES] Adding fulldisjunctions to the contrib |