Re: CommitFest 2009-09, two weeks on

Michael Meskes írta:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 03:47:07PM +0200, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>
>> You're not being fair with me. The dependencies are quite
>> technical.
>>
>
> I'm sorry that you interpreted my email this way, it wasn't at all meant to
> offend you.
>

Please, accept my apologies, I only tried to express my
frustration, this is not a good situation for either of us.
You were busy with your job and other occupations.
We have a serious project going on that depend on
ECPG being more compatible to Informix.

>> First, Tom Lane suggested to unify core and ecpg FETCH
>> syntaxes so both will accept optional FROM/IN, which I did.
>> SQLDA support adds new FETCH forms (Informix-specific
>>
>
> This is actually one I was talking about. Adding SQLDA *only* seems like an
> easy one, as soon as it also hits the parser it becomes more complicated. This
> is not to say that it is not doable, but it wasn't for me with my time
> constraints. I was just explaining why I didn't delve into these any more so
> far.
>

This is now clear, I will separate that part out and post it.
But this means that the same core grammar parts will be touched
twice because two basic things are done there:
- optional FROM/IN in core grammar, ECPG grammar updated
- "name" -> "cursor_name" transition in cursor-related statements
in the core grammar and the dynamic cursorname patch
So, technically dependant patches again, but maybe easier on the reviewer.
Would this be accepted this way? Or the two modification washed into one?

>> When I first posted the split patchset, you didn't tell me that
>> the split is no good. I tried everything help I could to explain
>> why I did what.
>>
>
> Well actually I did, but that's not the problem here. I have no idea why you
> are ranting like this just because of me excusing myself for a lack of time.
>

I am very sorry, under stress sometimes I get like a steam
engine overloaded. Not a good behaviour at 37, I know.
I am very sorry.

>> Also, the current reviewer (Dan Colish) haven't contacted me despite
>> I offered help privately. I can't review my own patches, that's clear.
>> But I can't do anything else to speed review up but to offer my help
>> and wait for the help/explanation request that didn't arrive.
>>
>
> Okay, so it's all my fault. Do you feel better now?
>

It's not your fault at all, it's a difficult situation and I had to
express it somehow. My tone was not proper.

BTW, thanks for adding my small collected knowledge
about the ECPG grammar as official documentation.

>> Also, I have sent some independent very small patches, that don't
>> even need much review. One of them (the typo in pgc.l) was already
>> applied and I thank you Michael, but the memory leak fix for two
>> improperly freed numerics is still behind. Please, look at that patch,
>> it should be really obvious.
>>
>
> My last commit was one of your patches,

Yes, the pgc.l one-liner. Thanks again for committing that.

> obviously I didn't do anything on ecpg
> since. I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me, you might want to explain
> the last two sentences.

I thought you forgot that patch, the "please, look at that patch"
was an (I thought) polite request, it's really two one-liners.

> But keep in mind you are *not* the one to decide how I
> spend my spare time.
>

Obviously. Please, accept my apologies.

Best regards,
Zoltán Böszörményi

--
Bible has answers for everything. Proof:
"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more
than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:37) - basics of digital technology.
"May your kingdom come" - superficial description of plate tectonics

----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
http://www.postgresql.at/