David G. Johnston wrote:
Can we create a fake CF time period into which all of these waiting on
author entries can be placed and readily browsed/found instead of leaving
them in whatever CF they happened to stall in?
This seems a good idea to me -- not a fake CF, but a page listing all
the
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Apr 9, 2015 2:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
+1.
Is that at +1 for naming it moved, or for not having it? :-)
I can definitely go with moved. Buy I would like to keep it - the reason
for having it in the first place is to make
On 04/09/2015 09:09 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Moved is really only applicable, I think, for cases where we punt a
patch to the next CF for lack of time.
Well, that's basically what returned with feedback is now, so I
guess that one should just be renamed in that case. And we add
On 2015-04-09 15:09:55 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
If we just link the email thread, that would mean we loose all those
precious annotations we just added support for. Is that really what you
meant? We also loose all history of a patch, and can't see that a previous
version existed in a
Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
The right workflow here, IMO, is that a patch should be marked
returned or rejected, full stop; and then when/if the author submits
a new version for a future CF, there should be a way *at that time*
On Apr 9, 2015 2:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 9, 2015, at 1:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I'm not convinced we really need a version that closes and moves a
entry. But if we indeed want it we can just name it moved.
+1.
Is that at +1 for naming it
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Apr 9, 2015 2:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
+1.
Is that at +1 for naming it moved, or for not having it? :-)
I can definitely go with moved. Buy I would
On Thursday, April 9, 2015, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net wrote:
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','t...@sss.pgh.pa.us'); wrote:
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mag...@hagander.net'); writes:
On
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE SET (*) patch as returned with feedback,
but the CF app informed me that if I did
On April 8, 2015 9:28:50 PM GMT+02:00, Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net
wrote:
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE
On 04/08/2015 03:28 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com
mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net
mailto:pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
On Apr 9, 2015, at 1:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I'm not convinced we really need a version that closes and moves a entry. But
if we indeed want it we can just name it moved.
+1.
...Robert
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE SET (*) patch as returned with feedback,
but the CF app informed me that if I did that the patch would
automatically be moved to the next commitfest. That seems completely
stupid. There is no need
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 9, 2015, at 1:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@anarazel.de wrote:
I'm not convinced we really need a version that closes and moves a entry.
But if we indeed want it we can just name it moved.
+1.
+1. Sounds like a
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE SET (*) patch as returned with feedback,
but the CF app informed me that if I did that the patch would
automatically be moved to the next commitfest. That seems completely
stupid. There is no need to reconsider it unless a new
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE SET (*) patch as returned with feedback,
but the CF app informed me that if I did that the patch would
automatically be moved to the next commitfest. That
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut pete...@gmx.net wrote:
On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I tried to mark the UPDATE SET (*) patch as returned with feedback,
but the CF app informed me that if I did that
17 matches
Mail list logo
