On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 06:19:39AM +0530, Tony Wayne wrote: > These changes are for core ,I think it would be better to either move whole > changes to core or contrib as an extension.
Please avoid top-posting. The community mailing lists use bottom-posting, to ease discussions. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting > On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 6:09 AM David G. Johnston < > david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Usually you'd want to use format-patch so your commit message(s) make it >> into the artifact. Especially for something complex/large. The community wiki has some guidelines about all that: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch In my experience, it is much easier to sell a feature to the community if a patch is organized into independent useful pieces with refactoring pieces presented on top of the actual feature. In order to achieve that `git format-patch` is essential because it is possible to present a patch set organizing your ideas so as others need to spend less time trying to figure out what a patch set is doing when doing a review. format-patch with `git am` is also quite good to track the addition of new files or the removal of old files. Writing your ideas in the commit logs can also bring a lot of insight for anybody reading your patches. For simpler and localized changes, using something like git diff would be also OK that can be applied with a simple `patch` command can also be fine. I've done plenty of work with patches sent to the lists this way for bug fixes. Of course this is case-by-case, for rather complex bug fixes format-patch can still be a huge gain of time when reading somebody else's ideas on a specific matter. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
