Message-ID: From: "davecramer (@davecramer)" To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 16:09:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] PR #4075: docs: restructure site, compatibility page, changelog-driven releases In-Reply-To: References: List-Id: X-GitHub-Author-Login: davecramer X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 4520413230 X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment X-GitHub-Issue: 4075 X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc X-GitHub-Type: comment X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/4075#issuecomment-4520413230 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Yeah, I agree that you should create a new PR Dave Cramer On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 9:04 AM Sehrope Sarkuni ***@***.***> wrote: > *sehrope* left a comment (pgjdbc/pgjdbc#4075) > > > I'd strongly suggest we close this PR so that whatever is going to be > reviewed stands on its own. The rest of the commentary in this thread is > not relevant and would only be distracting. > > I'd also suggest getting feedback and acceptance on new code additions > (e.g., the enum stuff and it's code processor to generate docs) before > going down a rabbit hole of building and running it. That way you don't > feel like been a waste of time if the idea itself is shot down. > > Finally, if you're going to present this as something for others to > review, get rid of the sausage factory of LLM commits and structure it into > logical chunks that you would expect from a human. I don't care if you use > AI to write code. But I'm not going to step through 100+ "phase 1a: > refactor the flubber thingamabob" with multi paragraph meaningless commit > messages. You need to squash it down to something presentable before > opening a PR. This dump everything on reviewers approach is not going to > work. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > , or > unsubscribe > > . > You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: > ***@***.***> >