Re: knngist patch support - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Oleg Bartunov
Subject Re: knngist patch support
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.64.1002111805210.16860@sn.sai.msu.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: knngist patch support  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: knngist patch support
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010, Robert Haas wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:00 AM, Oleg Bartunov <oleg@sai.msu.su> wrote:
>>> version I saw hadn't any documentation whatever.  It's not committable
>>> on documentation grounds alone, even if everybody was satisfied about
>>> the code.
>>
>> well, there is enough documentation to review patch.
>
> Where is there any documentation at all?  There are no changes to doc/
> at all; no README; and not even a lengthy comment block anywhere that
> I saw.  Nor did the email in which the patch was submitted clearly lay
> out the design of the feature.

Well, initial knngist announce
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-11/msg01547.php
isn't enough to review ? We made test data available to reproduce
results, see http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/wiki/2009-11-25
We are here and open to any reviewer's question.

>
>> In my understanding
>> this was always enough to submit code. User's documentation is depend on
>> discussion and review and can be added later
>> before releasing beta.
>
> Several people have said this lately, but it doesn't match what I've
> seen of our practice over the last year and a half; Tom regularly
> boots patches that lack documentation (or necessary regression test
> updates).  Sure, people often submit small patches without
> documentation thinking to fill it in later, but anything major pretty
> much has to have it, AFAICS.  From my own point of view, I would never
> commit anything that lacked documentation, for fear of being asked to
> write it myself if the patch author didn't.  Of course it's a bit
> different for committers, who can presumably be counted on to clean up
> their own mess, but I still think it's fair to expect at least some
> effort to be put into the docs before commit.

I think nobody will spend his time to write sgml code for user's
documentation for fear his patch will be rejected/moved/getting rewritten,
so his time will be just wasted.
    Regards,        Oleg
_____________________________________________________________
Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru),
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make standby server continuously retry restoring the next WAL
Next
From: Michael Meskes
Date:
Subject: Re: patch to implement ECPG side tracing / tracking ...