Re: [gsmith@gregsmith.com: Re: [patch] GUC source file and line number]

Greg Smith wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>>> (I dropped the "default" stuff for now, as it doesn't seem that a
>>> consensus has been reached on that topic.)
>>
>> This is one of the reasons I suggested keeping that one as a separate
>> patch in the first place. The other main reason being that once it gets
>> applied, you really want it to be two different revisions, to clearly
>> keep them apart
>
> This means some committer is going to have to make a second pass over the
> same section of code and do testing there more than once, that's a waste
> of time I was trying to avoid.

Actually, this is done all the time.

> Also, any standalone patch I submit right now won't apply cleanly if
> the source file/line patch is committed.

You can always start from the patched version and use interdiff to
obtain a "patch difference" ...

> If nobody cares about doing that work twice, I'll re-submit a separate
> patch once this one is resolved one way or another. I hope you snagged
> the documentation update I added to your patch though.

Yeah, I did.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support