Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZRB7u98UksjWDU5-LjC-bDWJ=XzcxOa5aBHLDXERnDhsw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric
Re: Abbreviated keys for Numeric |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > Guys, can we please knock it off with the dueling patches? > > Peter, it's really not all that helpful to take somebody else's patch, > rewrite it in a form that they may or may not agree with (even if it's > just the comments), and post that as "v2". And when the person then > posts "v3" that reverts most of your changes, don't go put them all > back and call that "v4". Instead, you should take the hint: these are > not "versions" of the same patch - they are two different approaches > to the same problem. In this type of situation, I generally post my > patch with a name like "topicofthepatch-rmh-v1.patch" or > "topicofthepatch-rmh-20150323.patch", putting my initials in there to > show that this is my version of the patch, not the original author's > and that it may or may not be endorsed by the original author. Having > 26 versions of this patch where all of the odd-numbered versions looks > like Andrew's original version and all of the even-numbered versions > look like Peter's "v2" is not going to make anybody happy - not either > of you, not me, and not anybody else here. As I said, I don't really consider that my patch is a rewrite, especially V4, which changes nothing substantive except removing 32-bit support. I do take your point, though - Andrew's objections should have been reason enough to name my patches another way. I don't want to take credit for Andrew's work, though, since very little of substance has actually been changed. I can understand why his remarks would give the impression that this is some kind of rewrite, but they mostly applied to my removal of numeric tracking of non-NULL values. He won that argument, so that's now irrelevant. I must also admit that I am somewhat annoyed here, since Andrew has questioned essentially ever revision I've proposed to both of the sort support patches he wrote, and in a rather bellicose way. They were mostly very modest revisions. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: