From Petr Skoda (skodak at centrum.cz) Friday, 21 July 2006, 09:23 PM:
assigning to MartinL
From Jun Yamog (jun at catalyst.net.nz) Monday, 24 July 2006, 06:55 AM:
Tested the patch on postgresql 7.4.13, I have modified it and removing the hotpot section. The hotpot author has detected the problem and fixed his module. I have made another patch file that will patch with the current moodle16_stable.
Thanks Iñaki for catching and fixing this.
From Eloy Lafuente (stronk7 at moodle.org) Monday, 24 July 2006, 11:00 PM:
For reference: http://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=49304
I really think this could be a good example to do in some Hackfest (test/commit/merge/commit)
From Martin Langhoff (martin at catalyst.net.nz) Monday, 31 July 2006, 01:53 PM:
Guys – committed to MOODLE_16_STABLE. Trying to apply it to HEAD, I am realising that there is something I don't quite agree with in the changes to mod/quiz/db/postgres.php. The changes are messing up the existing upgrade blocks.
Why do we have that in the middle of the upgrade?
From Iñaki Arenaza (iarenuno at eteo.mondragon.edu) Monday, 31 July 2006, 09:05 PM:
Re: changes to mod/quiz/db/postgres.php, I'm not sure if the things you don't like are with the patch or the original code (your sentence is not that clear ).
The mod/quiz/db/postgres.php patch moves the insertion of the prefix_question_attempts(id) values below the code that creates prefix_quiz_attempts(uniqueid). Previously the code tried to use the uniqueid column before it was actually added to the table. We get a nice SQL error
From Martin Langhoff (martin at catalyst.net.nz) Tuesday, 1 August 2006, 04:06 PM:
Iñaki – actually, after discusssing it with Jun, the changes (moving the insert from one block to the other) are good but it shows up weird in the diff. Now, that isn't bad per-se, but it fails to apply against HEAD – and when I looked at the patch and compared it to HEAD nothing made any sense.
Jun showed me today that it does make sense (thanks!) and that the reason it doesn't apply in HEAD is that there are some unmerged changes, apparently from Eloy. what we don't know is whether they are unmerged on purpose or by omission – I think they should be applied, but Eloy may have good reasons for skipping them.
sorry about the confusion!
From Jun Yamog (jun at catalyst.net.nz) Wednesday, 2 August 2006, 12:58 PM:
I have removed the reordering of the insert with conflicts with head. Please review pgpatch2
From Iñaki Arenaza (iarenuno at eteo.mondragon.edu) Wednesday, 2 August 2006, 06:46 PM:
It looks good to me.
From Tim Hunt (T.J.Hunt at open.ac.uk) Thursday, 3 August 2006, 07:25 PM:
Looks OK to me.
It is a pity that it was not possible to do it all with table_column().