Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqRf776TUQWuCOGoz3F0x_7mcZqJ7GFm2PB5AxDGwXzczQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
>> On 4/7/15 3:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I tried to mark the "UPDATE SET (*)" patch as "returned with feedback",
>>> but the CF app informed me that if I did that the patch would
>>> automatically be moved to the next commitfest.  That seems completely
>>> stupid.  There is no need to reconsider it unless a new version of the
>>> patch is forthcoming (which there may or may not ever be, but that's
>>> beside the point for now).  When and if the author does submit a new
>>> patch, that would be the time to include it in the next commitfest, no?
>>
>> I noticed that as well and have avoided closing some patches because of it.
>
> Several people, including me, have complained about this before.  I
> hope that Magnus will fix it soon.

Yeah, you can find references about that here and there... And the
current behavior is confusing.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq's multi-threaded SSL callback handling is busted
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_dump / copy bugs with "big lines" ?