On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 12:33:00PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 12/27/2010 11:54 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >After a bit of experimentation, I can say that this is better than > >Andrew's hack, but it's still a good distance shy of something that > >should be automated or treated as a hard requirement. > > I'm always happy if someone produces something better than I did :-) > > On a more general point, it would be useful to have some > infrastructure for running quality checks like this and publishing > the results. We should be way beyond the point where we rely on > individuals doing this sort of stuff.
This sounds like an excellent early candidate for the bitrot farm. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
