On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 12:37:25PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > >> Why don't you add the proposal to the commitfest? > > > > This issue is so much larger than the patch's validity that I don't see > > how that would work. > > I hate to be rude here, but I think you're being ridiculous. We have > a well-established procedure for getting patches reviewed around here, > and while it is not perfect, it mostly works. If you try that > procedure and it doesn't work, then I think you have a right to > complain. But to object, on the one hand, that people aren't going to > look at the patch, and then to refuse to add it to the tracking tool > that the project uses to ensure that patches get looked at, seems > patently unfair.
The problem is that I don't believe this patch is commit-ready --- someone needs to research the IS NULL tests in all areas of our code to see if they match this patch, and I can't do that. Is that something a reviewer is going to be willing to do? I don't think I have ever seen a commit-fest item that still required serious research outside the patch area before committing. I could ask just for feedback, but I have already received enough feedback to know I can't get the patch to a ready-enough state. I think requiring commit-fest reviewers come to the same conclusion is just making extra work for them. Still, if you want me to add it to the next commit-fest, please let me know. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
