> That's more of an habit to look around, find similar patterns and the
> check if these are covered.
>
> I have applied your patch, and you may want to be careful about a
> couple of things:
> - Please avoid top-posting on the mailing lists:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Top-posting
> Top-posting breaks the logic of a thread.
> - Your patch format is good. When sending a new version of the patch,
> it may be better to send things as a complete diff on the master
> branch (or the branch you are working on), instead of just sending one
> patch that applies on top of something you sent previously. Here for
> example your patch 0002 applied on top of 0001 that was sent at the
> top of the thread. We have also guidelines about patch submission:
> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Michael
Hi Michael
First of all, thank you for merging my patch.
And I'm sorry, I should have been more careful about it. Next time I
will follow format. And there is something I will tell you
Would you mind if I ask you specify my author info
with --author on the git commit?
The new contributor can get involved in the PostgreSQL project.
When they sent a patch and it was merged to the main repository,
it'd be better to keep the author info on the git commit, IMHO.
Because many opensource hackers who interested in
PostgreSQL project can want to keep a record of author info
on commits they wrote. Otherwise, contribution records can not be found
by 'git shortlog -sn' and GitHub and OpenHub cannot track their
opensource contribution records...
So what about using --author for PostgreSQL contributors
when merging their patches? like the Linux Kernel project
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8a16c09edc58982d56c49ab577fdcdf830fbc3a5
If so, many contributors would be highly encouraged.
Thanks,
Dong Wook
