* Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> [100114 02:17]: > One of the things I'm increasingly frustrated by (and don't take this > personally, this is a general comment coming more from the last CF > rather than something I mean to single you out for) is how many patch > submissions we get that don't have *compelling* examples showing their > value. Have a better programming approach to something? Show me the old > way and how the new way is better. Performance improvement? Provide a > complete, self-contained example showing how to demonstrate it. New type > of feature? Cut and paste a whole session showing how it's used, with > every single command you typed after initdb.
Wow, I can't agree more... I've seen *so* many patches fly by that don't mean *anything* to me with the description sent to -hackers, until I find out what they actually do, or could do, until I find it in my RSS reader, via: > I hope that everyone submitting patches > reads http://www.depesz.com/ at least once in a while. One of the things > I really enjoy about his blog is how he shows complete working examples > of so many patches. To pick a standout recent entry, > http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/ > > takes "exclusion constraints"--a feature I didn't follow a bit of the > discussion about--and works through the whole feature with a series of > examples that, while still complicated, are completely self-contained > and possible to follow along until you understand how it all fits > together. <what he said>++ > Patch submitters should consider it a goal to make life that > easy for the reviewer stuck with checking their patch out. Yes, submitters, please specifically try to make Hubert's life easier, because we *all* will appreciate it... -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, ai...@highrise.ca command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
