Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
>> was ;-). The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
>> entirely on Bruce. The list he maintains is just there to ens
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
> was ;-). The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
> entirely on Bruce. The list he maintains is just there to ensure that
> nothing slips through the cracks.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Neil Conway wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
> >>> and approves it.
> >>
> >> does this reflect a change in the patch applicatio
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
>>> and approves it.
>>
>> does this reflect a change in the patch application procedures?
In my mind this
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
> > and approves it.
>
> Hey Bruce,
>
> does this reflect a change in the patch application procedures? (i.e. in
> the past the pgpatches list you main
