Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi> writes:
> The documentation has definitely improved from the last time Robert
> looked at it, but I fear it still needs some more work.  I'm willing to
> do that work, but I need something concrete.

It seems to me documentation is required to get into the source tree
before beta, and as we see with some other patches it's definitely the
case even with our newer procedures that some code gets in without its
documentation properly finished. I guess this amounts to the commiter
willing to fill up the docs later on.

But here it's even better as we have the author willing to stay there
and write needed documentation as soon as community agrees on what that
is.

In case I'm not clear, what I'm saying is that I think we can consider
the writable CTE patch ready for commit even though we still have to
decide what its impacts on documentation should be.

There has to be a difference between last alpha and first beta, right?

Regards,
-- 
dim

In response to

• Re: damage control mode at 2010-02-07 20:48:34 from Marko Tiikkaja

Responses

• Re: damage control mode at 2010-02-07 21:34:26 from Robert Haas
• Re: damage control mode at 2010-02-08 15:25:36 from Alvaro Herrera

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: David E. Wheeler	Date: 2010-02-07 21:25:38
	Subject: Re: Hot standby documentation
Previous:	From: Marko Tiikkaja	Date: 2010-02-07 20:48:34
	Subject: Re: damage control mode