Re: next CommitFest
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: next CommitFest |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200911131431.nADEVLD02980@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: next CommitFest (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: next CommitFest
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 08:47 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > We do ask people to write docs, but I > > don't think we will reject patches if people don't supply docs. > > Yes, that is a good example. It's "a rule", plain and simple. Nobody > gets their spleen removed for breaking it, yet it is still somehow > enforced. > > I find it strange that suggesting a new rule is opposed on the general > basis that *any* rule cannot be enforced; surely therefore we cannot > have new rules at all, ever? We clearly do have new rules from time to > time. So what's wrong with this new rule? > > Should we update the FAQ to say, "enclosing docs with a patch is a rule, > but actually its not really and you only suffer mild rebuke if you break > it and can therefore be ignored"? Well, right now we ask for docs, but if they are not supplied, I think we just write them ourselves. Is a different enforcement method being suggested here? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: