- "#1.15">1.15).
-
will be reviewed by other contributors to the project and will be
- either accepted or sent back for further work. Also, please try to
- include documentation changes as part of the patch. If you can't do
- that, let us know and we will manually update the documentation when
- the patch is applied.
+ either accepted or sent back for further work. To help ensure your patch
+ is reviewed and committed in a timely fashion, please try to make sure your
+ submission conforms to the following guidelines:
+
+
Ensure that your patch is generated against the most recent version
+ of the code, which for developers is CVS HEAD. For more on branches in
+
+
Try to make your patch as readable as possible by following the
+ project's code-layout conventions. This makes it easier for the
+ reviewer, and there's no point in trying to layout things
+ differently than pgindent. Also avoid unnecessary whitespace
+ changes because they just distract the reviewer, and formatting
+ changes will be removed by the next run of pgindent.
+
+
The patch should be generated in contextual diff format (diff
+ -c and should be applicable from the root directory. If you are
+ unfamiliar with this, you might find the script
+ src/tools/makediff/difforig useful. (Unified diffs are only
+ preferable if the file changes are single-line changes and do not
+ rely on surrounding lines.)
+
+
PostgreSQL is licensed under a BSD license, so any submissions must
+ conform to the BSD license to be included. If you use code that is
+ available under some other license that is BSD compatible (eg. public
+ domain) please note that code in your email submission
+
+
Confirm that your changes can pass the regression tests. If your
+ changes are port specific, please list the ports you have tested it
+ on.
+
+
Provide an implementation overview, preferably in code comments.
+ Following the surrounding code commenting style is usually a good
+ approach.
+
+
New feature patches should also be accompanied by documentation