On 11/08/2013 03:42:56 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 11/08/2013 12:18 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> >
> > On 11/08/2013 02:12:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake
> >>
> >> wrote:
> Should I go ahead and apply that portion, then?
> >>> I am certainl
On 11/08/2013 12:18 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
On 11/08/2013 02:12:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
superuser privileges; it's the selective-dump case where you can
often
get by without them. I've attached a proposed patch along these
lines
f
On 11/08/2013 02:12:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake
>
> wrote:
> superuser privileges; it's the selective-dump case where you can
> often
> get by without them. I've attached a proposed patch along these
> lines
> for your consideration.
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
superuser privileges; it's the selective-dump case where you can often
get by without them. I've attached a proposed patch along these lines
for your consideration.
>>> That's fair.
>> Should I go ahead and apply that portion,
On 11/08/2013 06:04 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
This isn't software, it is docs. It is ridiculous to suggest we break this
up into 3-4 patches. This is a small doc patch to a single doc file
(backup.sgml).
I don't think it's ridiculous, but
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> This isn't software, it is docs. It is ridiculous to suggest we break this
> up into 3-4 patches. This is a small doc patch to a single doc file
> (backup.sgml).
I don't think it's ridiculous, but you can certainly disagree.
>> superuser
On 09/27/2013 03:56 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV
wrote:
Thanks for a detailed response. I attached a patch file that builds on your
corrections and introduces some of the edits discussed above.
This patch makes at least five unrelated sets of chan
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> On 09/27/2013 05:56:52 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> 1. Attempting to encourage people to consider custom format dumps.
>
>> What's important is what you can do...
>
> Your critique seems obvious in retrospect. Sorry you had
> to s
Hi Robert,
On 09/27/2013 05:56:52 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> 1. Attempting to encourage people to consider custom format dumps.
> What's important is what you can do...
Your critique seems obvious in retrospect. Sorry you had
to step in here and do my job. The above point is particularly
sali
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV
wrote:
> Thanks for a detailed response. I attached a patch file that builds on your
> corrections and introduces some of the edits discussed above.
This patch makes at least five unrelated sets of changes:
1. Attempting to encourage people to c
On 09/26/2013 12:15:25 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote:
>
> On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:56 AM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
>
> > On 07/31/2013 12:08:12 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote:
> >
> >> Patch filename: backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch
> >>
> >> The third version of this patch takes into consideration feedback
> >> r
On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:56 AM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 12:08:12 PM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote:
>
>> Patch filename: backup.sgml-cmd-v003.patch
>>
>> The third version of this patch takes into consideration feedback
>> received after original submission (it can be read starting from this
On 09/02/2013 10:56:54 PM, Karl O. Pinc wrote:
> I have frobbed your to adjust the indentation and
> line-wrap style.
Oops. Somehow left a \ out of this. Anyhow, you get the idea.
Karl
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
--
Sent
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Michael Paquier escribió:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV >wrote:
> >
> > > The patch does pass 'make check' and 'make html' successfully.
> > >
> > Your patch does not add new code, but just documentation, so there is
Michael Paquier escribió:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV
> wrote:
>
> > The patch does pass 'make check' and 'make html' successfully.
> >
> Your patch does not add new code, but just documentation, so there is no
> risk that make check would fail, except if an error has been
Hi,
Could you add this documentation patch to the next commit fest such as it
doesn't get lost in the stack?
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view?id=19
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Ivan Lezhnjov IV wrote:
> The patch does pass 'make check' and 'make html' successfully.
>
Y
16 matches
Mail list logo
