Stephen On 13/09/2015 15:26, Charles Clavadetscher wrote:
Hello StephenOn 13/09/2015 14:49, Stephen Frost wrote:Charles, Just FYI, on these lists, we'd prefer it if you wouldn't top-post. * Charles Clavadetscher (clavadetsc...@swisspug.org) wrote:Yes, of course. I will take care of that and send a new patch.Thanks!Who will then git push it?I'd be happy to take care of it, though any of the committers may pick it up, of course. If there's a concern about the patch being missed or forgotten then it can be added to the commitfest system (here: http://commitfest.postgresql.org). I don't believe there's a risk of that here, but you're welcome to add it if you'd like, of course.Thank you for your feedback.Thank you for working on this! StephenIn the attachement the new patch. I was not able to create one with both commits so I also added the first one. I think that documentation should be as complete as possible, but if you say that there is no risk in missing the update, then I don't see a need to add a line in the commitfest. Thank you also for the hint on top-posting. I was not aware of that. Have a good Sunday. Charles
I noticed that the position of the parameter "policy_name" in the description list of parameters was not at the (alphabetically) correct position. I changed that and the result is attached.
I think/hope that is now all correct. Thank you and bye Charles
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers