On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Claudio Freire (klaussfre...@gmail.com) wrote: >> > As another point, it's also the very first thing that we document in >> > http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch to check for. >> >> TBH, that wiki link seems to suggest that *having context* is the >> point of the requirement (to be able to merge with fuzz). > > The PG wiki link states "Is the patch in context diff format?" and > provides a link to the wikipedia article about *that specific format*. > There's absolutely zero confusion over what "context diff format" means.
True, but I'm with Heikki: it's a pedantic and unhelpful guideline. Everyone here who reviews patches regularly knows how to, and probably does, convert between those formats with regularity. Making patch submitters feel badly because they've used the "wrong" format does not advance the goals of the project. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
