Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >
> > Hiroshi Inoue writes:
> >
> > > Probably I overlooked the conclusion then.
> > > What was the conclusion of the discussion ?
> >
> > Personally, I think there wasn't any. Personally part 2, showing some
> > code is always a good way for new contributors to show they're for real.
>
> Certainly but once an accomplished fact is there, it requires
> a great deal of efforts to put it back to the neutral position.
> For example, all I've done this month are such kind of things.
Yes, certain features have different implementation possibilities.
Sometimes this information is coverd in TODO.detail, but often it is
not.
I assume your point is that once a patch appears, it is harder to argue
to change the implementation than if they had asked for a discussion
first.
I guess the only thing I can say is that we shouldn't feel bad about
asking more questions and opening up implementation issues, even if a
patch has already been prepared. I should give a larger delay for
applying those patches so people can ask more questions and bring up
implementation issues.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026