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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
