Re: lwlocknames.h beautification attempt
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
From: Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet@singh.im>, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-03-17T06:43:41Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2025-Mar-16, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 3:38 PM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > I forgot to send a note here that I pushed this patch. Thank you. > > I'm confused. Tom and I both said we didn't like this change, so you > committed the patch without further discussion? Tom didn't say he didn't like this change. He said he didn't like a different change, which is not the one I committed. And your opinion was quite thin on arguments, and you didn't reply for 11 days after I expressed intention to apply a simplified version of Gurjeet's patch. > I mean, this is a pretty unimportant detail, so I don't really want to > fight about it too much, but that really doesn't seem like a consensus > to me. Would you have objected if I had proposed to use that style to begin with? You can see that the thread where this was discussed [1] was pretty light on coding style/output style discussion. It seems hard to argue that the original had achieved any kind of consensus. [1] https://postgr.es/m/202401231025.gbv4nnte5fmm@alvherre.pgsql -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Make lwlocknames.h generated file less ugly
- da0f0582e81e 18.0 landed