All,
I'd like to clarify our patch submission expectations as I think
there's been some confusion recently:
- Typically each new feature or change should be a single patch,
ideally in it's own mail thread for future tracking/searching etc.
- Large patches may be broken up into 2 or more smaller patches to aid
the review process. Typically this might be infrastructure changes,
then the new feature. A good rule of thumb is "is each patch useful in
its own right?".
- If patches are rejected (as is often the case for the first
submission), please do not send back an ever-increasing set of patches
correcting issues in the earlier ones. Please squash the changes down
into a replacement patch.
Patch review is a tedious and difficult job at the best of times -
careful generation and organisation of patches makes a surprising
difference to that process.
Thanks all, and keep 'em coming :-)
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
