On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 07:06:59PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> I would strongly suggest to Tim that he rip the portions of this patch > >>> that are related to this feature out and submit them separately so > >>> that we can commit the uncontroversial portions first. > >> > >> See my previous email. I suggested that Tim send three patches: one for > >> this > >> controversial stuff, one for the new utility functions for plperl, and one > >> for the remainder. He and I have discussed it and I believe he is agreeable > >> to that. > > > > OK, well then just +1 for that. > > I believe we have agreement on this course of action, so I'm going to > mark the current patch as Returned with Feedback. Hopefully Tim will > submit separate patches for each of these three areas in the next day > or two before start-of-CommitFest
That's my plan. Plus, hopefully at least one more for inter-sp calling. > personally, I think they should > each get their own thread and their own entry in the CommitFest app, > for ease of tracking and reviewing. YMMV, of course. Yes, that was also my intent. Tim. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
