On Sep 2, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Here's a completely novel idea: accept incremental patches.

I don't think it's as novel as all that --- personally I've always
preferred to tackle large projects incrementally.

I think that accepting incremental patches to a mainline is _bad_ and that accepting them in general is good (as you have to go through that process outside of version control sometimes anyway). Sticking them in CVS however can get a bit messy. This is where other version control systems that have a bit better branching and merging support has an advantage as people can work in the repository on their project in separate branches and pulling them all back together again (once an overall satisfaction metric has been reached) is not excruciatingly painful. Where am I going with this? From my experience accepting incremental patches is a _bad_ idea unless you have a VCS that has really makes it _easy_ to manage them. Sounds like more work than worth on the postgres project as it is now.

Additionally, what problem is accepting incremental patches supposed to solve?

// Theo Schlossnagle
// CTO -- http://www.omniti.com/~jesus/
// OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. -- http://www.omniti.com/

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to