| From: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: ProcessUtility_hook |
| Date: | 2009-12-01 11:52:08 |
| Message-ID: | 4B150368.6080509@timbira.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane escreveu:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> So, if someone writes a patch, and it is reviewed, and the patch author
>> updates the patch and replies, it still should be reviewed again before
>> being committed?
>
> Well, that's for the reviewer to say --- if the update satisfies his
> concerns, he should sign off on it, if not not. I've tried to avoid
> pre-empting that process.
>
That's correct. I didn't have time to review the new patch yet. :( I'll do it
later today. IIRC Tom had some objections (during the last CF) the way the
patch was proposed and suggested changes. Let's see if the Takahiro-san did
everything that was suggested.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira
http://www.timbira.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brar Piening | 2009-12-01 11:54:03 | Re: Application name patch - v4 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-12-01 11:50:57 | Re: CommitFest status/management |