| From: | "D'Arcy" "J(dot)M(dot)" Cain <darcy(at)druid(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us (Bruce Momjian) |
| Cc: | darcy(at)druid(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Syntax errors in current tree |
| Date: | 1999-01-18 12:59:48 |
| Message-ID: | m102EHU-0000bmC@druid.net |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thus spake Bruce Momjian
> Fixed. I assume people test the patches before submission, so I don't
Not an unreasonable assumption.
> usually compile after each one. I did add some code in gram.y, and that
> was what caused the problem.
I don't think that the core maintainers should have to compile each
and every patch before committing it. However, perhaps a form letter
can go out to each new submitter asking if their patch was tested and
holding their first patch till they respond affirmatively. Once they
have a history, even of one patch, then accept their submissions as
long as they appear good.
Maybe we need a way to track this. Anyone know of a good system for
tracking this sort of BASic DATA. :-)
> Sorry. Blech (Sound of me falling on my sword. :-))
That's OK. I just hope it was lying flat on the ground at the time. :-)
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy(at){druid|vex}.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 424 2871 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jose' Soares | 1999-01-18 13:24:41 | about RULES |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 1999-01-18 12:35:27 | Re: [HACKERS] Postgres Speed or lack thereof |