Robert Haas wrote: > What is a bit frustrating to me is that a number of Tom's changes to > the first two patches were trivial whitespace changes that required me > to rebase for no obvious reason. Either those changes were made > accidentally as Tom was fooling around with what I had done, or they > were made because Tom had some reason to believe that they would play > more nicely with pgindent, though what those reasons may have been is > entirely opaque to me. > > I think that it is good for us as a community to talk about the > reasons why Tom changes patches. If some of them are bad reasons, > maybe talking about it will persuade him to stop. If they are good > reasons, perhaps the rest of us can learn from them. But I think it > behooves us to talk about specific problems rather than engage in > open-ended griping. I haven't been a member of this community for a > super-long time, but already I can see that there is a correlation > between who wrote the patch and how heavily it gets edited on commit.
Sometimes I clean up code style in patches because I don't know there are other patches depending on it; if I knew there were, I would be less likely to change patched code, but it is hard to remember which patches have others pending and which don't. Perhaps being explicit might help remind patch appliers. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
