On Sun, 2009-11-15 at 17:17 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> writes: > > So I'm in favor of committing part of the HS code even if there are > > known failure conditions, as long as those conditions are well-defined. > > If we're thinking of committing something that is known broken, I would > want to have a clearly defined and trust-inspiring escape strategy.
If it is broken, we shouldn't commit it at all. Commit it to some "other" git branch and call it, postgresql-alpha3-riggs-heikki if you must but keep it out of core. > > I agree with Heikki that it would be better not to commit as long as > any clear showstoppers remain unresolved. > Agreed. Joshua D. Drake > regards, tom lane > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering If the world pushes look it in the eye and GRR. Then push back harder. - Salamander -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
