* Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote:
> David's work is potentially useful, but having two versions of a
> feature slows things down. Since he is new to development here, I have
> made those comments so he understands, not so you would pick up on
> that.
I have a bad tendency of replying to email which is replying to comments
which I made. :)
> "didn't seem to be moving forwards" is strange comment. We usually
> wait for patches to stabilise, not for them to keep changing as
> evidence of worth.
I have to admit that I'm confused by this. Patches don't stabilise
through sitting in the archives, they stabilise when the comments are
being addressed, the patch updated, and further comments are addressing
less important issues. The issues which Robert and I had both commented
on didn't appear to be getting addressed. That seems to be due to
Abhijit being out, which is certainly fine, but that wasn't clear, at
least to me.
> David, please submit your work to pgsql-hackers as a patch on
> Abhijit's last version. There is no need for a pull request to
> 2ndQuadrant. Thanks.
Ugh. For my part, at least, having patches on top of patches does *not*
make things easier to work with or review. I'm very glad to hear that
Abhijit is back and has time to work on this, but as it relates to
submitting patches for review to the list or to the commitfest, I'd
really like those to be complete patches and not just .c files or
patches on top of other patches. To the extent that it helps move this
along, I'm not going to object if such patches are posted, but I would
object to patches-on-patches being included in the commmitfest. I've
not spent much time with the new commitfest app yet, but hopefully it
won't be hard to note which patches are the complete ones.
Thanks!
Stephen