On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 08:24 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > Simon Riggs wrote: > > As Greg mentions on another thread, not all patches are *intended* to be > > production quality by their authors. Many patches are shared for the > > purpose of eliciting general feedback. You yourself encourage a group > > development approach and specifically punish those people dropping > > completely "finished" code into the queue and expecting it to be > > committed as-is.
> If you post a patch that is not intended to be of production quality, it > is best to mark it so explicitly. Then nobody can point fingers at you. > Also, Bruce would then know not to put it in the queue of patches > waiting for application. So it can be forgotten about entirely? Hmmmm. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
