Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I wonder why the restriction is there, which is probably part of the
> > reason that I'm thinking of phrasing the documentation that way.
> >
> > Bey
Amit,
* Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> On 2017/04/26 0:42, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not sure what you mean here. We're always going to call both
> > getInherits() and getPartitions() and run the queries in each, with the
> > way th
se:
COMMENT ON table ADD ' new text';
Though we have this pretty powerful language, seems a bit of a shame to
invent something new for working with comments.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > Having COMMENT ON accept a general query whose result is then cast to
> > text and stored as the comment would allow this to be done, eg:
>
> > COMMENT ON table IS (pg_get_comment('table') ||
my proposed patch as my patch changes pg_dump
to not output the now-noise-words WITH OPTIONS at all.
> 0004: Fix a bug in pg_dump's --binary-upgrade code that caused ALTER TABLE
> INHERIT to be emitted to attach a partition in addition to of ALTER
> TABLE AT
Noah,
* Noah Misch (n...@leadboat.com) wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 11:58:23PM +0000, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > The status is simply that I've been considering Robert's comments regarding
> > the documentation and have had a busy weekend. I'll provide an
Amit,
* Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> Sorry about the delay.
No worries, I'm just back from being in NY and will take a look at this
tomorrow (wrt the open item, I'll provide a status tomorrow).
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
t confused about what needs to be qualified and what doesn't.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I agreed already up-thread that there's an issue there and will be
> > looking to fix it. That comment was simply replying to Rod's point that
> >
ming in APIs.
Haven't looked at the patch, but +1 for this change.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
to add and will take a look at doing that
tomorrow, but this hopefully closes at least the latest issue.
Assuming this looks good to you, I'll push it tomorrow, possibly with
other minor adjustments and perhaps a few more tests.
Thanks!
Stephen
diff --git a/src/bin/pg_dump/common.c b/src/b
Alvaro,
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
> > In the meantime, I noticed that pg_dump support for extstats is not
> > covered, which I'll go fix next.
>
> Here I add one, which seems to work for me.
>
> Considerin
Amit,
* Amit Langote (amitlangot...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Amit Langote (langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp) wrote:
> >> Attached updated patches.
> >
> > Please find an updated version which corrects the is
e replaced by something like
>
> # User-supplied prove flags can be provided in PROVE_FLAGS.
Works for me.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Amit,
* Amit Langote (amitlangot...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Assuming this looks good to you, I'll push it tomorrow, possibly with
> > other minor adjustments and perhaps a few more tests.
>
> Your latest patch look
Robert, all,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I agreed already up-thread that there's an issue there and will be
> > looking to fix it. That comment was simply replying to Rod's point that
> &g
and the improvmenets in the planner, along with
parallel query and the advantages offered by being able to pull a CTE
into the main query, I think I've come around to agree that removing the
optimization fence, when it won't change the resullts, is a good thing
to do.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Rod, Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I agreed already up-thread that there's an issue there and will be
> > looking to fix it. That comment was simply replying to Rod's point that
> &g
or now we should go
ahead and fix the obvious unintentional bug in the code around ALL
policies and back-patch that as a bug fix, we can then consider if
changes should be made here in future releases independently.
Assuming there aren't objections to that, I'll plan to push this fix
later tonight or tomorrow.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Noah,
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 23:19 Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 05:47:02PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Amit Langote (amitlangot...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stephen Frost
> wrote:
> > > > Assuming this looks g
- Foreign Keys for Array Elements
Student: Mark Rofail
Mentors: Alexander Korotkov, Stephen Frost, Alvaro Herrera
Please be welcoming to our students as they learn about our community,
project, code, and how to communicate on the mailing lists and begin
their hacking on PostgreSQL!
Feel free to
ed
the fix and it'll be included in the next round of patch releases.
I'd definitely like to chat further at some point regarding what really
makes sense here and if we should be considering a change, and, further,
how we can improve the documentation to be more clear.
Thanks!
Stephen
s
I made and understand why they were necessary. Certainly, feel
free to reach out if you have any questions or notice anything else
which should be improved.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
we may have cause to think about the point we are in the heap or in an
index.
> So this boils down to whether we are willing to touch any of these
> column names in order to improve consistency. I think it might be
> worth doing, but there's no doubt that we're adding more compatibility
> pain if we do anything but #1 or #3.
#2 strikes me as the best option, though that's probably not much of a
surprise to anyone whose been following my comments on this thread.
> PS: There are some other changes in David's patch, such as
> s/position/location/ in some text, that I think we should do in any
> case. But the first decision has to be about the view column names.
Agreed.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
e to have something like this
built into core.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
d if Thursday still is the
> intended alpha/beta release date, Wednesday would be too late, no?
Releasing alpha/beta is not the same as branching, which I didn't expect
us to do for a while yet..
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2017-05-14 17:22:16 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> > > On 2017-05-14 09:53:17 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > I would like to run pgindent on the head source tree th
er about forward/backwards
compatibility in such lists and if SQLSTATE really covers all
cases/distinctions which are interesting when it comes to making this
decision.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
he point of this period of time between feature freeze and actual
release is, more-or-less, to figure out if the solution we've reached
actually is a good one, and if not, to do something about it.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
omplains. We don't need to fix it Right This Instant.
Fair enough.
> Maybe add this to the list of open issues to reconsider mid-beta?
Works for me.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ee to start from.
+1.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Tom, all,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> All in all, this looks pretty darn good from here, and I'm thinking
> we should push forward on it.
+1.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
we're going all in. That
> means reformatting the back branches to match too. That diff
> is already big enough to be a disaster for back-patching, and
> we haven't even considered whether we want to let pgindent adopt
> less-inconsistent rules for comment indentation. So I thi
d submit this to the
> Commitfest.
Yes, please add it to the commitfest.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
, releasing 10.0 with a 10beta1 catversion would have negative value.
>
> I'm not really for doing it that way, but I'm willing to apply the fix
> if there's consensus for your position. Anybody else have an opinion?
I tend to agree with Noah on this one.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
se then, for example, it wouldn't be possible to do
channel binding with a LibNSS client and an OpenSSL server or with other
combinations and I find that rather hard to believe.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > The specific APIs are, certainly, going to be different between
> > different TLS implementations and I don't believe we need to be
> > particular
David,
* David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Robins Tharakan (thara...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > Attached is a patch adds a --no-comments argument to pg_dump to skip
> > > generation
inadequate as a description.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ov.html
https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/executor/nodeCustom.c.gcov.html
https://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/executor/tqueue.c.gcov.html
Let's. please. work together to correct this.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Tom,
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > * Craig Ringer (cr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> >> At the moment that'd be 9.5, since that's where PostgresNode was
> >> introduced. But if I can find the time I'd quite lik
Tom,
On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 01:16 Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > In the end, the experiences I've had with pg_dump of late and trying to
> > ensure that pg_dump 9.6 is able to work all the way back to *7.0*, makes
> > me think that this notion of put
but allows people to see that their
independent changes on the main repo aren't what caused the buildfarm to
turn red).
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
e of the equation here when it comes
to buildfarm owners. Generally speaking, I've seen them be pretty
reasonably responsive when asked to make a change or update something,
and a lot of them are also regular PG contributors, but even those who
aren't seem to take the buildfarm seriously
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > ... and I don't believe that we should be asking the
> > implementors of channel binding to also implement support for multiple
> > TLS libraries in Postgr
David,
* David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:41 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * David G. Johnston (david.g.johns...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Stephen Frost
> > wrote:
> > > > * Robins
h the point of it being releasable, but turns it
into a feature that I'd have a really hard time recommending to anyone,
and are we absolutely sure that there aren't any cases where there might
be an issue of undetected promotion, leading to the complications which
you describe?
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Andres,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2017-05-31 21:27:56 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Uh, TL;DR, wow? Why isn't this something which needs to be addressed
> > before PG10 can be released?
>
> Huh? Slots are't present on replicas, ergo there
Andres,
* Andres Freund (and...@anarazel.de) wrote:
> On 2017-05-31 21:33:26 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > This only starts becoming an issue once logical replication slots can
> > > exist on replicas and be maintained to follow the master's slot state.
> > &g
Craig,
* Craig Ringer (cr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 1 June 2017 at 09:27, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Craig Ringer (cr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> >> TL;DR: replication origins track LSN without timeline. This is
> >> ambiguous when physical failover is pres
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > If your comments regarding the requirement that we have interoperability
> > testing of this feature before accepting it were intended to mean that
> > we need
Robert,
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I certainly wouldn't object to someone working on this, but I feel like
> > it's a good deal more work than perhaps you're realizing (and I tend to
>
personally
(indexes?). Also, with the changes that I've made to pg_dump, I'm
hopeful that such options will end up requiring a very minor amount of
code to implement. There's more work to be done in that area too,
certainly, but I do feel like it's better than it was.
I definitely would like to see more flexibility in this area in general.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
; expose users to a broken TLS implementation...
> MacOS has something similar to OpenSSL, with
> SSLGetProtocolVersionMax(), which is nice.
We mainly need to know what version was used, right..? Isn't that
available?
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
opy to an
exactly identically sized partition on the remote side or similar..),
and while you could encrypt the PG files during the backup, that
requires that you make sure both sides agree on how that encryption is
done and have the same tools for performing the encryption/decryption.
Possible, certainly, but not nearly as convenient.
+1 for having this capability.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
data back out, and required
that checksums be in place to allow us to test if decrypting with a
specific key worked ... lots more hand-waving here... ).
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:04:21AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Also, in the use case you describe, if you use pg_basebackup to make a
> > > direct encrypted copy of a data directory, I think that would mean you'
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 12:23:01PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Of course, if the
> > > key stored in the database is visible to someone using the operating
> > > system, we really haven't added muc
do that and if they
do then that's their choice.
Let us, please, stop stressing over the right way to do key management
as part of this discussion about providing encryption. The two are
different things and we do not need to solve both at once.
Further, yes, we will definitely want to get
s an idea that
it's "simple" to add X, Y or Z additional requirement beyond the basic
feature, but we don't have anything yet. I continue to be of the
feeling that we should start simple and keep it to the basic feature
first and make sure that we can actually get that right before we start
looking into adding on additional bits.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:01:32PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > Well, usually the symetric key is stored using RSA and a symetric
> > > cipher is used to encrypt/decrypt the data. I was thinking of a case
> > >
Joe,
* Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
> On 06/13/2017 10:20 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Joe Conway (m...@joeconway.com) wrote:
> >> Except shell escaping issues, etc, etc
> >
> > That's not an issue- we're talking about reading the stdout of
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:44:51PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Just to be clear, I don't have any issue with discussing the idea that
> > we want to get to a point where we can work with multiple keys and
> > enc
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 01:25:00PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > I think the big win of Postgres doing the encryption is that the
> > > user-visible file system is no longer a target (assuming OS permissions
> >
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:23:39PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I'm not trying to shut down discussion, I'm simply pointing out where
> > this feature will be helpful and where it won't be. If there's a wa
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:38:58PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > It's good to discuss what the feature would bring and what cases it
> > doesn't cover, as well as discussing how it can be designed to make sure
> &
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 6/13/17 15:20, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > No, the benefit is that the database administrator can configure it and
> > set it up and not have to get an OS-level administrator involved. There
> > may also
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 6/13/17 15:20, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > And then you would need openssl on the other system to decrypt it.
>
> Or make the USB file system encrypted as well? If you're in that kind
> of environmen
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 03:20:12PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > OK, so let's go back. You are saying there are no security benefits to
> > > this vs. file system encryption.
> >
> > I'm not sur
Peter,
* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 6/13/17 18:11, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> Let's see a proposal in those terms then. How easy can you make it,
> >> compared to existing OS-level solutions, and will that justify the
> >>
27;t be passed on.
This tends to be what people (as pgbouncer does) use application_name
for.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
et any
> ideas.
Actually, the approach SSH uses is a really good one, imv, and one which
we might be able to leverage.. I'm not sure though. I will say that,
in general, I like the idea of leveraging the external libraries which
handle keys and deal with encryption to make this happen as those allow
things like hardware devices to hold the key and possibly perform the
encryption/decryption, etc.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 06:41:08PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > > > > One serious difference between in-database-encryption and SSH keys is
> > > > > that the use of passwords for SSH is well understood and rea
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 07:27:55PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > I expect the same would happen with the shell-command approach suggested
> > up-thread and the prompt-on-stdin approach too, they aren't great but I
> >
ceholder and
then it's a pretty quick cscope to find where it's used (or another
grep, I suppose).
> Personally I'd be fine with 100 or so, but when I'm using buffers side by
> side, or when I'm working in poor conditions where I've set my terminal to
>
above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 10 open item. Stephen,
> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open
> item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a
> v10 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please obser
behaving strangely. After some debugging I found that \gx does not work if
> > you have \set FETCH_COUNT n before. Please find attached a patch that fixes
> > this incl. new regression test.
Fixed in 0cdc3e4.
Thanks for the report!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ve to register somewhere?
> >
>
> Ha, that's interesting.
>
> Should be fixed now, please try again.
Almost certainly because he hadn't logged into the commitfest app at the
time that the initial set of committers were selected, so he didn't have
an account on the CF
would be nicer,
but then these options would just become "shorthand" for the generic
switch.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
you have to rsync both /opt/PostgreSQL/9.5 AND
> > /opt/PostgreSQL/9.6,
> > wouldn't /opt/PostgreSQL/9.6 suffice? Or does this assume "pg_upgrade
> > --link"
> > AND "rsync --hard-links" and therefore it somewhat needs to transfer less
> > data
ll
require solving the communicate-over-the-network problem between the
primary and the replicas, which is the hard part. Whether it's an
independent utility or something built into pg_upgrade isn't really that
big of a distinction, though it doesn't seem to me like there'd b
Tom, all,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
> Alright, here's an updated patch which cleans things up a bit and adds
> comments to explain what's going on. I also updated the comments in
> acl.h to explain that ordering actually does matter.
Getting back to t
s me
as unnecessairly adding risk, should someone end up doing the wrong
command. Also, again, if I was doing this, I'd absolutely run rsync
with --dry-run for starters and review what it is going to do and make
sure that's consistent with what I'd expect.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
If there's more than one way to do something and
they're all correct and reasonable, then I could see us choosing the
route that matches what others in the industry do, but I don't see
simply ignoring user input in this specific case as really correct and
therefore it's be
baseline requirements of pg_upgrade is to *not* screw
with the existing cluster. Removing its WAL or "cleaning it up"
definitely seems like it's violating that principle.
I tend to agree that it'd be good for the documentation to address this,
but this is all really getting t
actoring of little-to-never changed code, it's refactoring bits of
the system which are changed with some regularity and looks likely to
continue to need change as we add more features moving forward, and
perhaps add greater controls over process startup.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
ck against. amcheck is
> alphabetically first among contrib modules that have tests, IIRC.
Yes, I was working with someone earlier today who ran into exactly the
same issue. If you don't 'make world' or make the individual contrib
modules, then 'make installcheck-world' isn't going to work.
I do think it'd be nice if we could provide a better error message in
such a case..
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Michael,
* Michael Paquier (michael.paqu...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > No, one of the baseline requirements of pg_upgrade is to *not* screw
> > with the existing cluster. Removing its WAL or "cleaning it up"
>
m thinking about something like this: check if
the extension is available and, if not, skip the check of that module,
with a warning or notification that it was skipped because it wasn't
available.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
al authentication system (Kerberos, for
example) which can deal with this, but I do think this is also something
we should be considering for core, especially now that we've got a
reasonable password-based authentication method with SCRAM.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Bruce,
* Bruce Momjian (br...@momjian.us) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 01:28:11PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> > > chiru r writes:
> > > > We are looking for User profiles in ope source PostgreSQL.
> > > >
thod has been deprecated in PG10 in
favor of the non-exclusive backup method, which avoids this by not
creating a backup label file (it's up to the backup software to store
the necessary information and create the file for use during recovery).
Please see:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/sta
ilt
upon should be included into core. PG is often deployed in complex
ecosystems where we need to work with other systems and this is an
important part of that.
Also, to some extent, I'm hopeful that being both open to new features,
when they make sense, and providing more ways for other systems to
work with PG, will lead to more contributions and hopefully regular
contributors who can help us maintain the code base as it continues to
grow.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
* Magnus Hagander (mag...@hagander.net) wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 7:43 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Satyanarayana Narlapuram (satyanarayana.narlapu...@microsoft.com) wrote:
> > > During crash recovery, last checkpoint record information is obtained
> > from the
t..? For my 2c, at least, I'm
pretty open to clarifying things in the back-branches (and we have
technically had restrictive policies for a while, they just required
using an extension, so even those pieces are relevant for older
versions, but might need additional caveats...).
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Dean,
* Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 26 September 2017 at 00:42, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > That's a relatively minor point, however, and I do feel that this patch
> > is a definite improvement. Were you thinking of just applying this for
> > v1
If it was reasonably fixable with only
small/local changes and without a catversion bump then I'd be more
inclined to keep it, but I gather from the discussion that's not the
case.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
essages in the logs
and I can not help but feel that this is a ridiculous amount of effort
being put into the analysis of something that *didn't* happen.
Thanks!
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
le to do in a
more formal way that minimizes the risk of getting things incorrect,
missing someone, or mis-attributing something. This all involves mostly
work on the .Org system, which we do have some folks working on now but
is also open source and it certainly wouldn't hurt to have more
ence.
I'm happy to work up a documentation patch for this when I get back.
Thanks!
Stephen
On Tuesday, July 21, 2015, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 8:56 PM, Peter Geoghegan > wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Peter Geoghegan > wrote:
> >
601 - 700 of 4541 matches
Mail list logo
