From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Include Lists for Text Search |
Date: | 2008-03-10 13:42:43 |
Message-ID: | 47D53AD3.7040603@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:24 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>> Simon Riggs wrote:
>>
>>> As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be
>>> production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the
>>> purpose of eliciting general feedback. You yourself encourage a group
>>> development approach and specifically punish those people dropping
>>> completely "finished" code into the queue and expecting it to be
>>> committed as-is.
>>>
>
>
>> If you post a patch that is not intended to be of production quality, it
>> is best to mark it so explicitly. Then nobody can point fingers at you.
>> Also, Bruce would then know not to put it in the queue of patches
>> waiting for application.
>>
>
> So it can be forgotten about entirely? Hmmmm.
>
>
I think if you post something marked Work In Progress, there is an
implied commitment on your part to post something complete at a later stage.
So if it's forgotten you would be the one doing the forgetting. ;-)
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2008-03-10 13:43:09 | Re: Maximum statistics target |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-03-10 13:31:09 | Re: Include Lists for Text Search |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-03-10 14:01:57 | Re: Include Lists for Text Search |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-03-10 13:31:09 | Re: Include Lists for Text Search |