> On Mar 17, 2016, at 12:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
> --
> Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
>+1-503-667-4564
> PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:34 PM, David G. Johnston
wrote:
> If we do this how many new developers are we expecting to subscribe to the
> -hackers list and make serious contributions - say, by reviewing the large
> backlog of patches we presently have?
I would certainly welcome even one new contr
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think it's important that we fix these issues in a way that doesn't
> degrade the readability of the prose, and that doesn't call attention
> to itself as "hey, we're being so politically correct!". We're trying
> to convey technical informati
On 03/17/2016 02:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" writes:
On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
+1 what? Are you saying this patch is good? I don't think it is: the
previous sentence is written in third person, and the following ones are
currently in third person, but the pat
On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
+1.
+1 what? Are you saying this patch is good? I don't think it is: the
previous sentence is written
Chapman Flack writes:
> On 03/17/16 17:29, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> A grep with a quick skim of the results to exclude references to
>> particular people who are mentioned by name and then referred to
>> with a pronoun (which I assume we can leave alone), suggest there
>> are about 70 lines in the
"Joshua D. Drake" writes:
> On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> +1 what? Are you saying this patch is good? I don't think it is: the
>> previous sentence is written in third person, and the following ones are
>> currently in third person, but the patch changes the following sentence
WIP patch to comments and documentation. Note that I ignored the release notes,
as I don't know if it is appropriate to change those retrospectively. A few of
the
changes make the prose worse and will likely be rejected, but I included the
best
change that came to mind as a starting point for c
> On Mar 17, 2016, at 5:40 PM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
>
>> On Mar 17, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Alvaro's original complaint that the sentences no longer agree as to
>>> person is on-point.
>>
>> That's reasonable. Still
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> Debating whether or not somebody is currently upset about this, and
> how upset the are, and what the value is of fixing it is missing the
> point. When somebody sends a patch for a typographical error, we
> don't say: well, we could fix that
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To m
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Chapman Flack wrote:
> For those of us who are outside of the twitterverse sort of on purpose,
> are there a few representative links you could post? Maybe this is such
> fresh breaking news Google hasn't spidered it yet, but I didn't find
> any reference to the pr
> On Mar 17, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Alvaro's original complaint that the sentences no longer agree as to
>> person is on-point.
>
> That's reasonable. Still, there are only a few existing instances of
> gendered pronouns
On Thursday, March 17, 2016, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Chapman Flack > wrote:
> > For those of us who are outside of the twitterverse sort of on purpose,
> > are there a few representative links you could post? Maybe this is such
> > fresh breaking news Google hasn't
On 03/17/16 19:09, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Not to pick on you in particular...
> Debating whether or not somebody is currently upset about this, and
> how upset the are, and what the value is of fixing it is missing the
> point.
Well, looking
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake
> wrote:
> > Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
>
> +1.
+1 what? Are you saying this patch is good? I don't think it is: the
previous sentence is written in third person, and the following ones
On 03/17/16 17:29, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Sexist language is a distraction
>> for some, in-your-face non-sexism (such as made-up pronouns) is a
>> distraction for others, bad or awkward grammar is a distraction for yet
>> others. It's not th
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
> On 18/03/16 09:41, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>
>>
>>
>>> (*) I'm probably going to be expelled from the project for saying this,
>>> but I very much doubt that female coders stay awa
Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >Robert Haas wrote:
> >>On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake
> >>wrote:
> >>>Per the twitter verse, here is an updated version of primnodes.h
> >>
> >>+1.
> >
> >+1 what? Are you saying this patch is good? I do
On 18/03/16 09:41, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 03/17/2016 01:36 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
[...]
(*) I'm probably going to be expelled from the project for saying this,
but I very much doubt that female coders stay away from PostgreSQL just
because some files say "he" in comments rather than "
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 11:41 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Note that since multiple lines with gender-specific pronouns
> sometimes are near each other and thus show up in the same block,
> there are 59 blocks in 42 files.
Adding two more pronouns I noticed in a closer scan of the initial results
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro's original complaint that the sentences no longer agree as to
> person is on-point.
That's reasonable. Still, there are only a few existing instances of
gendered pronouns in the code, so fixing them carefully, without
losing anything impor
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 6:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Chapman Flack writes:
>> On 03/17/16 17:29, Kevin Grittner wrote:
>>> A grep with a quick skim of the results to exclude references to
>>> particular people who are mentioned by name and then referred to
>>> with a pronoun (which I assume we can
Peter Geoghegan writes:
> (In case it matters, I'm in favor of this proposal on its merits).
For the record, I'm also in favor of fixing that para, but I'd like
to see attention paid to grammatical correctness as well as political.
Alvaro's original complaint that the sentences no longer agree as
25 matches
Mail list logo
