Re: New CF app deployment
| От | Jeff Janes |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: New CF app deployment |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMkU=1x1tHThKFkFri0PJo-e4Swfueow_JqZyV-ixu72e+BwgA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: New CF app deployment (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
> I think the old system where the patch submitter declared, this message
> contains my patch, is the only one that will work.
I tend to agree. That being said, calling out latest attachments is
also useful (or highlighting that a particular mail has a particular
file attached in general).We can keep listing the attachment and just remove the automated check of what *kind* of attachment it is.
But when an email has multiple attachments, there should be some kind of indication that this is the case.
The line:
Attachment (attlognum-test.sql) at 2015-02-23 23:09:06 from Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra at 2ndquadrant.com> (Patch: No)
is misleading.
Cheers,
Jeff
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: