| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Typos in the code and README |
| Date: | 2024-09-04 15:34:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvohP80M6CLocGM_ycoM2tcTWBQu0i9_eKdgeyRQmn9bKQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 4 Sept 2024 at 20:24, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
> Not mandatory at all, but since you were prepping a typo backpatch anyways I
> figured these could join to put a small dent in reducing risks for future
> backports.
I think this is pretty good logic. I think fixing comment typos in
ancient code and backpatching to all supported versions isn't good use
of time, but fixing a typo in "recent" code and backpatching to where
that code was added seems useful. Newer code is more likely to need
bug fixes in the future, so going to a bit more effort to make
backpatching those bug fixes easier seems worth the effort. I just
don't know what "recent" should be defined as. I'd say if it's in a
version we've not released yet, that's probably recent. By the time .1
is out, there's less chance of bugs in new code. Anyway, I doubt hard
guidelines are warranted here, but maybe some hints about best
practices in https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Committing_checklist ?
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-09-04 15:36:21 | Re: Use streaming read API in ANALYZE |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-09-04 15:32:55 | Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more) |