From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: should I post the patch as committed? |
Date: | 2010-04-20 17:04:41 |
Message-ID: | h2o9837222c1004201004g293da98bp593f073839d66b97@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 18:30, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Bruce suggested to me off-list that when I commit a patch with
>> revisions, I ought to attach the committed patch to the email in which
>> I say that I have committed it. I know that Bruce habitually does
>> this, but I've never found it very helpful, since I prefer to look at
>> the patch either using the pgsql-committers emails or the git
>> respository.
>
> I quite agree --- people who want to read the committed patch are going
> to go to the source, not to what somebody claims he committed.
Yeah, +1. I always go to one of the other sources (most of the time,
the gitweb or git server).
It doesn't hurt to attach it if it happens to be around, but I
wouldn't suggest spending any extra effort on it...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-04-20 17:07:02 | Re: should I post the patch as committed? |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-04-20 16:55:18 | Re: pgindent and tabs in comments |