| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Within CF app, "Bug Fixes" should be "Bug Fixes/Refactoring" |
| Date: | 2015-11-06 05:52:44 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqTNRrs=4adaQCoPzLtHryYt+mxroBdknTSCEx=9EyD4AQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> "Refactoring" seems rather a narrow definition of what might show up
>>>> in such a category, btw. Maybe "Code Beautification" would be a
>>>> suitable title? I'm bikeshedding though.
>>>
>>> I think that there is value in limiting the number of topics. But I
>>> hardly but much weight on this. Any of the above are fine.
>>
>> Can someone follow up and push this to the CF app? "Refactoring" seems
>> to be the consensus.
>
> I guess I'm wondering whether there's really enough of this to need
> its own category.
We have a category "Code comments" as well. Let's give it a shot so I
am adding it. We could always remove it later if necessary.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-11-06 05:59:49 | Re: [PATCH] RFC: Add length parameterised dmetaphone functions |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2015-11-06 05:49:45 | Re: Request: pg_cancel_backend variant that handles 'idle in transaction' sessions |