"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> It would also be useful to have possible dependencies. I recently saw
> a patch come across from Sun, that Tom commented on, something about
> increase the size of some value to 64bit. I don't recall exactly.
> Tom's comments although valid (as usual :)) were that the person missed
> a bunch of stuff having to do with the planner.
> Some of us may think... well of course that is obvious...
> Well either the Sun guy was just lazy, or it isn't obvious. I prefer to
> think it is not obvious.
IIRC the problem with that patch was basically that the guy had failed
to search all of the source code for references to the struct he wanted
to modify. This isn't really the fault of the TODO list. It could be
(probably already is) a hint in the developer's FAQ ... but I can't see
putting that sort of generic how-to-develop-a-good-patch kind of info
into every TODO item.
regards, tom lane