Re: [PATCH] document
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] document |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8626d9ae-dd6a-ae44-2fd6-f753c4f61534@oss.nttdata.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [PATCH] document (Ian Lawrence Barwick <barwick@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] document
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2021/08/26 1:39, Justin Pryzby wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 09:50:13AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@oss.nttdata.com> writes: >>> When I applied the patch to the master, I found that the table entries for >>> those function were added into the table for aclitem functions in the docs. >>> I think this is not valid position and needs to be moved to the proper one >>> (maybe the table for system catalog information functions?). >> >> You have to be very careful these days when applying stale patches to >> func.sgml --- there's enough duplicate boilerplate that "patch' can easily >> be fooled into dumping an addition into the wrong place. I doubt that >> the submitter meant the doc addition to go there. > > I suppose one solution to this is to use git format-patch -U11 or similar, at > least for doc/ Yes. I moved the desriptions of the function into the table for system catalog information functions, and made the patch by using git diff -U6. Patch attached. Barring any objection, I'm thinking to commit it. Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: