I for one would like to keep the policy that we require a context
patch to be sent to the list.
Having to chase down everyone's git repo seems like more work rather than less
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 1:39 AM, Maciek Sakrejda <msakrejda@truviso.com> wrote:
>>> As far as I
>>> can tell, the reason the main project requires patches was to change
>>> the *process* as little as possible in the course of changing the VCS
>>> plumbing.
>>
>> That's *a* reason, but not the only one. Other large considerations are
>> that we consider that the act of submitting the patch to the mailing
>> list is evidence of intent to license the code under the Postgres
>> license, and further that this evidence is archived in the PG list
>> archives.
>
> That's an excellent point--thanks for the clarification.
> ---
> Maciek Sakrejda | System Architect | Truviso
>
> 1065 E. Hillsdale Blvd., Suite 215
> Foster City, CA 94404
> (650) 242-3500 Main
> www.truviso.com
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
