From: | Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: CREATE FOREIGN TABLE ( ... LIKE ... ) |
Date: | 2014-01-16 00:28:04 |
Message-ID: | 52D72794.20006@dalibo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/16/2014 01:21 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)dalibo(dot)com> writes:
>>> I am marking this patch as 'returned with feedback' in the commitfest app.
>> It looks like this patch got left behind in the previous commitfest.
>> What is the policy for moving it? Is it too late and will have to wait
>> until the next commitfest?
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=1254
> I think you were in error to mark it "returned with feedback", as that
> caused everyone to stop paying attention to it in that commitfest.
> (And David dropped the ball too, as he should have done something to
> bring it back from that state, if it was committable or nearly so.)
I see. Sorry about that.
> I see no reason why you shouldn't move it to the new fest; perhaps
> mark it as waiting on author, since really it's his responsibility
> to take the next step, ie comment on your version of the patch.
Done.
--
Vik
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-01-16 00:29:00 | Re: [Lsf-pc] Linux kernel impact on PostgreSQL performance |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2014-01-16 00:27:49 | Re: nested hstore patch - FailedAssertion("!(value->array.nelems == 1) |