Re: Strange behavior with polygon and NaN

At Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:29:09 -0700, Jacob Champion <jchampion@timescale.com> wrote in 
> As discussed in [1], we're taking this opportunity to return some
> patchsets that don't appear to be getting enough reviewer interest.

Oh, sorry. I missed that thread. Thank you for kindly noticing that.

> This is not a rejection, since we don't necessarily think there's
> anything unacceptable about the entry, but it differs from a standard
> "Returned with Feedback" in that there's probably not much actionable
> feedback at all. Rather than code changes, what this patch needs is more
> community interest. You might
> 
> - ask people for help with your approach,
> - see if there are similar patches that your code could supplement,
> - get interested parties to agree to review your patch in a CF, or
> - possibly present the functionality in a way that's easier to review
>   overall.
> 
> (Doing these things is no guarantee that there will be interest, but
> it's hopefully better than endlessly rebasing a patchset that is not
> receiving any feedback from the community.)
> 
> Once you think you've built up some community support and the patchset
> is ready for review, you (or any interested party) can resurrect the
> patch entry by visiting
> 
>     https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2710/
> 
> and changing the status to "Needs Review", and then changing the
> status again to "Move to next CF". (Don't forget the second step;
> hopefully we will have streamlined this in the near future!)

Thanks. I don't insist on this patch unless some other people are
interested in.

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center