Hello Robins,
> I was able to test the functionality (which seemed to work fine) and fed in
> my comment to assist anyone else reviewing this patch (and intentionally
> let it's state as 'Needs Review').
>
> While trying to provide my feedback, on hindsight I should have been more
> detailed about what I didn't test. Being my first review, I didn't
> understand that not checking a box meant 'failure'. For e.g. I read the
> sgml changes, which felt okay but didn't click 'Passed' because my env
> wasn't setup properly.
Hmmm, ISTM that it was enough. The feature is psql specific, so the fact
that it works against a 9.6 server is both expected and fine. So ISTM that
your test "passed".
Just running "make check" would run the non regression test, which is
basically what you tested online, against the compiled version.
Probably you should have a little look at the source code and doc as well.
> I've set this back to 'Needs Review' because clearly needs it.
Hmmm.
If you do a review, which I think you have done, then you have done it:-)
If you consider that your test was not a review and you do not intend to
provide one, then thanks for the feedback anyway, and maybe you should
consider removing yourself from the "Reviewer" column, otherwise nobody
will provide a review.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
