From: | Ryan Lambert <ryan(at)rustprooflabs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Fix XML handling with DOCTYPE |
Date: | 2019-03-26 22:17:49 |
Message-ID: | CAN-V+g-0p6-QU4YCUNpy4Uf0J_gAxwPZO-j8Gney9Dtnpc4Raw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ok, I'll give it a go.
> If you happened to feel moved to look over a documentation patch, that
> would be what this CF entry most needs in the waning days of the
> commitfest.
Is the xml-functions-type-docfix-4.patch [1] the one needing review? I'll
test applying it and review the changes in better detail. Is there a
section in the docs that shows how to verify if the updated pages render
properly? I would assume the pages are build when installing from source.
Ryan
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/100016/xml-functions-type-docfix-4.patch
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 4:52 PM Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> wrote:
> On 03/25/19 18:03, Ryan Lambert wrote:
> > The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
> > make installcheck-world: tested, passed
> > Implements feature: tested, passed
> > Spec compliant: not tested
> > Documentation: not tested
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the review! Yes, that part of this commitfest entry has been
> committed already and will appear in the next minor releases of those
> branches.
>
> That leaves only one patch in this commitfest entry that is still in
> need of review, namely the update to the documentation.
>
> If you happened to feel moved to look over a documentation patch, that
> would be what this CF entry most needs in the waning days of the
> commitfest.
>
> There seem to be community members reluctant to review it because of not
> feeling sufficiently expert in XML to scrutinize every technical detail,
> but there are other valuable angles for documentation review. (And the
> reason there *is* a documentation patch is the plentiful room for
> improvement in the documentation that's already there, so as far as
> reviewing goes, the old yarn about the two guys, the running shoes, and
> the bear comes to mind.)
>
> I can supply pointers to specs, etc., for anyone who does see some
> technical
> details in the patch and has questions about them.
>
> Regards,
> -Chap
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-03-26 22:26:31 | Re: speeding up planning with partitions |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-03-26 21:39:24 | Re: partitioned tables referenced by FKs |