Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 27431.1426698731@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit
Re: Rethinking the parameter access hooks for plpgsql's benefit |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> Basically, the same rules apply to all commitfests, i.e. a committer can >> apply anything during that period. I think the only restriction for the >> last commitfest is that the committer can not apply a new patch that >> would have been too big to be submitted to the last commitfest. If >> enough people feel that this committer behavior during the last >> commitfest is a problem, we can discuss changing that policy. > One thing that's crystal clear here is that we don't all agree on what > the policy actually is. Indeed. In this case, since the patch in question is one that improves/simplifies a patch that's already in the current commitfest, I'm going to go ahead and push it. If you want to call a vote on revoking my commit bit, go right ahead. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: