On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 11:47:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> > FYI, it is considered good practise to commit a patch at approximately
> > (or exactly) the same time on all branches, so tools like cvs2cl will be
> > more likely to collect the changes together.
Ok. I specifically delayed the second parts to see it run on a couple of
different platforms on th ebuildfarm. Wasn't aware of that part of how
cvs2cl worked - will do different next time.
> It's also helpful to use exactly the same text for the log messages in
> all the branches. Again, this is so that cvs2cl understands they're
> the same patch. I tend not to bother with "Backpatch to xxx" comments,
> as the CVS log makes that perfectly clear anyway; but if you use them,
> they should be the same for all branches committed to.
Ok. Wasn't aware of that part either, but will try to remember next time.
> > Comments like that are fragile (elog.c could change, for example), and
> > basically content-free anyway, IMHO. If you need to make SysLoggerPID
> > part of postmaster.c's external API, why not just do that, remove the
> > comment, and add the extern declaration to postmaster.h?
>
> The counterargument is that he avoided exporting SysLoggerPID to
> anything except elog.c. If it's in postmaster.h then who knows what
> will start depending on it? But I see Neil's point too; this coding
> is definitely a bit fragile.
That was my argument for doing it the way I did. I'll change it if you
want me to, of course :-) I can see both arguments, but can't quite
decide which wins...
//Magnus