* Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> [100114 02:17]:
> One of the things I'm increasingly frustrated by (and don't take this
> personally, this is a general comment coming more from the last CF
> rather than something I mean to single you out for) is how many patch
> submissions we get that don't have *compelling* examples showing their
> value. Have a better programming approach to something? Show me the old
> way and how the new way is better. Performance improvement? Provide a
> complete, self-contained example showing how to demonstrate it. New type
> of feature? Cut and paste a whole session showing how it's used, with
> every single command you typed after initdb.
Wow, I can't agree more... I've seen *so* many patches fly by that don't
mean *anything* to me with the description sent to -hackers, until I
find out what they actually do, or could do, until I find it in my RSS
reader, via:
> I hope that everyone submitting patches
> reads http://www.depesz.com/ at least once in a while. One of the things
> I really enjoy about his blog is how he shows complete working examples
> of so many patches. To pick a standout recent entry,
> http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/01/03/waiting-for-8-5-exclusion-constraints/
> takes "exclusion constraints"--a feature I didn't follow a bit of the
> discussion about--and works through the whole feature with a series of
> examples that, while still complicated, are completely self-contained
> and possible to follow along until you understand how it all fits
> together.
<what he said>++
> Patch submitters should consider it a goal to make life that
> easy for the reviewer stuck with checking their patch out.
Yes, submitters, please specifically try to make Hubert's life easier,
because we *all* will appreciate it...
--
Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.