DomainKey-Status: good
DomainKey-Signature: q=dns; a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; s=test; d=omniti.com;
	h=Authentication-Results:Received:In-Reply-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Subject:Date:To:X-Mailer;
	b=fSvT0MpHcS+0jxRkbx6oQSA0QswO7o2zG8y5i6PDTyNuROblTLRyYJksdm1zzzAr
	dwE1QM0qZFx/bY7DRB1CKGpgSYYy+UXZ5I/Wm5LfA8iqSGZ4sHvr89zQy2ffMN+B
In-Reply-To: <3246.1157210938@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <200609012225.k81MPwJ02170@momjian.us>
	<200609011639.42280.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<26043.1157154656@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200609020209.36483.peter_e@gmx.net>
	<20060902014835.GB14288@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<3246.1157210938@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <C146D2F0-0FA9-4505-B2DA-5032C0EFBAD8@omniti.com>
Cc: Theo Schlossnagle <jesus@omniti.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
	Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Theo Schlossnagle <jesus@omniti.com>
Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta 
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 11:41:48 -0400
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>


On Sep 2, 2006, at 11:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Here's a completely novel idea: accept incremental patches.
>
> I don't think it's as novel as all that --- personally I've always
> preferred to tackle large projects incrementally.

I think that accepting incremental patches to a mainline is _bad_ and  
that accepting them in general is good (as you have to go through  
that process outside of version control sometimes anyway).  Sticking  
them in CVS however can get a bit messy.  This is where other version  
control systems that have a bit better branching and merging support  
has an advantage as people can work in the repository on their  
project in separate branches and pulling them all back together again  
(once an overall satisfaction metric has been reached) is not  
excruciatingly painful.  Where am I going with this?  From my  
experience accepting incremental patches is a _bad_ idea unless you  
have a VCS that has really makes it _easy_ to manage them.  Sounds  
like more work than worth on the postgres project as it is now.

Additionally, what problem is accepting incremental patches supposed  
to solve?

// Theo Schlossnagle
// CTO -- http://www.omniti.com/~jesus/
// OmniTI Computer Consulting, Inc. -- http://www.omniti.com/