Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: libpq object hooks

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Patches (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Date: 2008-05-16 15:30:05
Message-ID: 17642.1210951805@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> All of this is getting quite a long way from what was in the commitfest 
> queue. Do we still want to try to get this in this cycle, or should it 
> be marked returned to author for more work?

So far I think it still falls within the category of allowing the author
to revise his work.  I don't want to hold commitfest open waiting on
revisions of this patch, but as long as there's still other stuff being
worked through I don't see why they can't keep trying.

Just for the record, I would really like to close this fest before
PGCon starts.  We still have a couple more days to get it done.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-05-16 15:31:14
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-16 15:26:13
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-05-16 15:31:14
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-05-16 15:26:13
Subject: Re: libpq object hooks

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group