Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > Robert Haas wrote: > >> Remove outdated comments from the regression test files. > >> > >> Since 2004, int2 and int4 operators do detect overflow; this was fixed by > >> commit 4171bb869f234281a13bb862d3b1e577bf336242. > >> > >> Extracted from a larger patch by Andres Freund. > > > I noticed with this commit that we are referencing pre-git-conversion > > git branches, basically adding a dependency on git to our commit > > messages. I don't see a problem with this, but did we ever reference > > CVS details in CVS commits? I don't remember any. > > I've usually preferred to use a date, eg, "my patch of 2009-10-07", > when referring to previous patches in commit messages. I think people > have occasionally mentioned CVS revision IDs, but the folly of that > should now be obvious. I agree that reference to a git hash is way > way way too fragile and git-centric.
Who's going to be the first to say that being git-centric can't ever be a bad thing? ;-) -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
