At Sat, 3 Mar 2018 09:46:11 -0500, Peter Eisentraut 
<> wrote in 
> On 3/1/18 23:39, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 02:27:13AM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> If I understand correctly there's been no progress on this since, and
> >> there'd definitely need to be major work to get something we can agree
> >> upon. Doesn't seem v11 material. I think we should mark this as returned
> >> with feedback.  Arguments against?
> > 
> > Agreed with your position.  The TAP tests rely on IPC::Run as a pillar
> > of its infrastructure.  I think that if we need a base API to do such
> > capabilities we ought to prioritize what we can do with it first instead
> > of trying to reinvent the wheel as this patch proposes in such a
> > complicated way.
> I haven't seen any explanation for a problem this is solving.  The
> original submission contained a sample test case, by I don't see why
> that couldn't be done with the existing infrastructure.
> Patch closed for now.

Agreed. This is not a v11 matter. Thanks.


Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

Reply via email to