On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 01:15:58PM +0200, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > > What's the point of that? It can't be applied without documentation, > > and it just makes life more complicated to have two separate patch > > files floating around. > It's easier to write the documentation for all changes at once. > I would have the same situation that happened with the code, > the patches with the documentation added would strictly depend > on each other again. Also, Michael Meskes applied the "string" > pseudo-type patch without the documentation, despite the patch > had it, maybe at an improper place. With a tongue-in-cheek
I don't get it. Are you blaming me for committing you patch although it had no documentation? Or for not committing the documentation part of it? I definitely did not remove anything on purpose. But if I missed something a short note would have been a better way to tell me. If the first interpretation is right I better not comment. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo/Skype: michaelmeskes, Jabber: mes...@jabber.org Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
