| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: patches in the pipe? |
| Date: | 2004-04-22 14:54:13 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0404221641220.6454@sablons.cri.ensmp.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
> > (1) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:36:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > Subject: [PATCHES] aclitem accessor functions
>
> I thought Peter didn't like it.
He asked 'why' I needed it. I answered his question.
He may or may not agree, I don't know!
> Would you repost and we can review it again.
Ok.
> > (2) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 19:35:57 +0200 (CEST)
> > Subject: [PATCHES] 'information_schema' considered a system schema
>
> I don't remember that one at all. Would you repost?
Ok.
> Basically, what happens on these patches is if someone says there is a
> problem, and you reply but it isn't clear that the problem is refuted or
> addressed,
That's what I do, but I can only "argue", not "refute" or "address"
issues. Whether it is refuted or addressed is in the head of the decider.
--
Fabien Coelho - coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-04-22 14:56:33 | Re: patches in the pipe? |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-04-22 14:27:29 | Re: patches in the pipe? |