Re: ProcessUtility_hook - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Subject Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Date
Msg-id 4B150368.6080509@timbira.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ProcessUtility_hook  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane escreveu:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>> So, if someone writes a patch, and it is reviewed, and the patch author
>> updates the patch and replies, it still should be reviewed again before
>> being committed?
> 
> Well, that's for the reviewer to say --- if the update satisfies his
> concerns, he should sign off on it, if not not.  I've tried to avoid
> pre-empting that process.
> 
That's correct. I didn't have time to review the new patch yet. :( I'll do it
later today. IIRC Tom had some objections (during the last CF) the way the
patch was proposed and suggested changes. Let's see if the Takahiro-san did
everything that was suggested.


--  Euler Taveira de Oliveira http://www.timbira.com/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tsutomu Yamada
Date:
Subject: [PATCH] Windows x64
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Block-level CRC checks