Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Feature patch 1 for plperl [PATCH]
Date: 2010-01-10 06:27:20
Message-ID: 25811.1263104840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> I think it would help if you could split this up into about 6 to 10
>> single-feature patches.

> ... having to handle 6 to 10 patches all hitting the same body of code
> doesn't sound terrible pleasant either.

Indeed. That sounds like rather a mess.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Treat 2010-01-10 06:28:46 Re: damage control mode
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-01-10 06:23:50 Re: win32 socket definition