Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PATCH: CITEXT 2.0 v3
Date: 2008-07-09 20:40:54
Message-ID: 20080709204054.GL3946@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David E. Wheeler wrote:
> I guess you're all just blown away by the perfection of this patch? ;-)

The problem is that we're in the middle of a commitfest, so everybody is
busy reviewing other patches (in theory at least).

One thing that jumps at me is pgTAP usage, as Zdenek said. I understand
that it's neat and all that, but we can't include the tests because they
won't run unless one installs pgTAP which seems a nonstarter. So if you
want the tests in the repository along the rest of the stuff, they
really should use pg_regress.

It's not even difficult to use. Have a look at contrib/ltree/sql and
contrib/ltree/expected for examples.

If you want to push for pgTAP in core, that's fine, but it's a separate
discussion.

The other possibility being, of course, that you are proposing citext to
live on pgFoundry.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aidan Van Dyk 2008-07-09 20:43:27 Re: [PATCHES] WITH RECURSIVE updated to CVS TIP
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2008-07-09 20:30:13 Re: No answers on CommitFest procedures?