On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Robbie Harwood <rharw...@redhat.com> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Robbie Harwood <rharw...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> - The GSSAPI authentication code has been moved without modification. >>> In doing so, the temptation to modify it (flags, error checking, that >>> big comment at the top about things from Athena, etc.) is very large. >>> I do not know whether these changes are best suited to another patch >>> in this series or should be reviewed separately. I am also hesitant >>> to add things beyond the core before I am told this is the right >>> approach. >> >> I would recommend a different patch if code needs to be moved around. >> The move may make sense taken as an independent piece of the >> integration. > > Sorry, are you suggesting separate patch for moving the GSS auth code, > or separate patch for changes to said code? I am happy to move it if > so, just want to be sure.
This is based on my first impressions on the patch. Let's discuss more those points once I got a more in-depth look at the patch with what it actually does. In short, there is no need to put more efforts in the coding now :) Sorry to confuse you. >> + * Portions Copyright (c) 2015-2016, Red Hat, Inc. >> + * Portions Copyright (c) 1996-2016, PostgreSQL Global Development Group >> I think that this part may be a problem... Not sure the feeling of the >> others regarding additional copyright notices. > > Good catch. That's an accident (force of habit). Since I'm pretty sure > this version won't be merged anyway, I'll drop it from the next one. > >> It would be good to add that to the next CF, I will be happy to get a >> look at it. > > Sounds good. Thanks for looking at it! Okay, let's do this. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers