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:

Reply via email to