| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: commit fests (was Re: primary key error message) |
| Date: | 2010-01-21 23:48:40 |
| Message-ID: | 4B589378020000250002E9C2@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> If you want an example of something I *do* have a process problem
> with, it's Kevin Grittner's attempts
Hmmm.... Plural? I've made exactly one post on the subject since
the CF started, unless you count review of Markus's dtester code,
which he posted before the CF but didn't add to the CF page. Is
reviewing that a process violation? Or was discussing it before the
CF the process issue?
After looking at my emails, I'm honestly confused. If it was the
milestone patch, and your plural was a slip, I'll hold off on
further such posts. If it's something else, I want to understand
what.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-01-21 23:52:54 | Re: warn in plperl logs as... NOTICE?? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-21 23:36:31 | Re: 8.5 vs. 9.0 |