On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 06:55 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> > I think we should review Masao's patch and ask him to make any changes
>> > we think are appropriate. There's no benefit to have multiple patch
>> > authors at one time.
>>
>> I did review his patch. It duplicates a few lines of logic and I
>> found a way to avoid that, so I proposed it. That seems totally
>> normal to me and I'm not sure what you're concerned about.
>
> I think we should concentrate efforts on just one patch: Masao's.
I understand that's your opinion, but you haven't explained why. My
approach is simpler and Fujii Masao has already endorsed it. I would
prefer that we focus on the technical issues here rather than who
wrote the patch. I believe that my approach is better because it
avoids duplicating code, which should reduce the chance of future
bugs, since someone might conceivably update one chunk of code but not
the other.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
