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

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app
Date
Msg-id CABUevEyYgEyuLGHjZ5z81Gw3Rfosm3ZmegAVht0DpWf4nva0+A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: "rejected" vs "returned with feedback" in new CF app
List pgsql-hackers
<p dir="ltr"><br /> On Apr 9, 2015 2:20 AM, "Robert Haas" <<a
href="mailto:robertmhaas@gmail.com">robertmhaas@gmail.com</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > On Apr 9, 2015, at 1:08
AM,Andres Freund <<a href="mailto:andres@anarazel.de">andres@anarazel.de</a>> wrote:<br /> > > I'm not
convincedwe really need a version that closes and moves a entry. But if we indeed want it we can just name it
"moved".<br/> ><br /> > +1.<p dir="ltr">Is that at +1 for naming it moved, or for not having it? :-)<p
dir="ltr">Ican definitely go with moved. Buy I would like to keep it - the reason for having it in the first place is
tomake the history of the patch follow along when it goes to the next cf. If we don't have the move option, I think
it'slikely that we'll be back to the same patch having multiple completely unrelated entries in different cfs. <p
dir="ltr">/Magnus<br /> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Making src/test/ssl more robust
Next
From: Shigeru HANADA
Date:
Subject: Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs (Re: [v9.5] Custom Plan API)