| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set |
| Date: | 2020-01-19 21:20:37 |
| Message-ID: | 15951.1579468837@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On Jan 19, 2020, at 12:20 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 12:46:19PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think you are right that individual committers could set up such hooks
>>> in their own private repos. But that's not what was being suggested,
>>> or so I thought.
> Client side hooks of this kind could be useful for developers without
> community commit privileges, since local repository commits could also be
> rejected, perhaps with an “are you sure” type override option, and more
> than a catversion checking hook would be possible.
Yeah, the point that this could be useful to non-committer contributors
seems pretty compelling. The catversion complaint in particular would
*not* be useful, since you're generally not supposed to include catversion
bumps in submitted patches --- but I can easily envision that other
check-hooks might be of widespread use.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2020-01-20 00:02:49 | Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2020-01-19 21:12:58 | Re: pgsql: Add a non-strict version of jsonb_set |