Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > Peter has replied to previous patches so I assume he would have
> > > commented on this one if he didn't like it. It was already
> > > adjusted to take Peter's comments into account.
> > The question is has anyone reviewed it? I certainly haven't,
> > because I was expecting Peter to review it (and commit it if
> > appropriate).
> > When we are in beta I do not think the default action for submitted
> > patches should be "apply unless someone objects". We need a higher
> > standard in this period, ie, actual careful review.
> OK, Peter, you want to look at that patch?
I've said several times before that I did not particularly like the
functionality added by that patch (building non-server modules, and
building contrib modules outside the normal build system). Therefore,
I didn't put it high in the to-look-at queue. It might help if someone
else would comment on whether we want this.
In response to
pgsql-committers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2004-08-29 16:34:48|
|Subject: pgsql-server: Widen xl_len field of XLogRecord header to 32 bits, so |
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2004-08-29 05:07:04|
|Subject: pgsql-server: Pgindent run for 8.0.|