OK, with two people now concerned, patch reverted. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > I've always found it easier to review uncommitted patches than committed > > ones anyway. When you're playing catch-up by reviewing a committed > > patch, you have to deal with three states of the code rather than two > > (pre-patch, post-patch, your own mods). That gets rapidly worse if the > > patch has been in there awhile and other changes go in on top of it. > > Plus, once other changes accumulate on top, it becomes extremely painful > > to revert if the conclusion is that the patch is completely broken. > > (A conclusion that I don't think is at all unlikely with respect to > > this patch.) > > > > > > > > Easy or not this strikes me as good policy. And nothing is urgent quite > yet - we still have another 18 days to the end of the month, which is > the stated deadline for getting patches reviewed and committed. > > cheers > > andrew > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
