Tom Lane writes:
> I'm a little uncomfortable with that whole approach to things, and was
> intending to suggest that you submit the SSL changes as one big patch.
> I feel that this is not letting me see the big picture ... quite aside
> >from the probability of breakage if patches get applied out-of-order.
I had suggested to Bear Giles in private mail that he resend his original
big patch as little pieces that preferrably change only one thing at a
time. At least for me this makes it easier to see what is going on.
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: sugita||Date: 2002-05-29 16:04:20|
|Subject: Make factorial(0::int2) return 1, as per spec.|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2002-05-28 14:50:48|
|Subject: Re: revised sample SRF C function; proposed SRF API |