2012-06-29 15:01 keltezéssel, Andres Freund írta:
Hi,
On Friday, June 29, 2012 02:43:52 PM Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
trying to review this one according to
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch
# Is the patch in context diff format
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diff#Context_format>?
No. (Does this requirement still apply after PostgreSQL switched to GIT?)
Many people seem to send patches in unified format and just some days ago Tom
said it doesn't matter to him. I still can't properly read context diffs, so I
am using unified...
Unified diffs are usually more readable for me after following
the Linux kernel development for years and are shorter than
context diffs.
# Does it apply cleanly to the current git master?
No. The patches 01...09 in this series taken from the mailing list apply
cleanly, 10 and 11 fail with rejects.
Yea, and even the patches before that need to be rebased, at least partially
they won't compile even though they apply cleanly.
I will produce a rebased version soon, but then we haven't fully aggreed on
preliminary patches to this one, so there doesn't seem to be too much point in
reviewing this one before the other stuff is clear.
Marking the patch as "Returned with Feedback" for now. I have done the same
with 13, 15. Those seem to be too much in limbo for CF-style reviews.
Thanks!
You're welcome.
Andres
--
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
http://www.postgresql.at/
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
