On 2/14/15 7:30 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com
> Can we make it smarter, so that the kinds of things people produce
> intending for them to be patches are thought by the CF app to be
> patches?
>
>
> Doing it wouldn't be too hard, as the code right now is simply:
>
> # Attempt to identify the file using magic information
> mtype = mag.buffer(contents)
> if mtype.startswith('text/x-diff'):
> a.ispatch = True
> else:
> a.ispatch = False
>
>
> (where mag is the API call into the magic module)
>
> So we could easily add for example our own regexp parsing or so. The
> question is do we want to - because we'll have to maintain it as well.
> But I guess if we have a restricted enough set of rules, we can probably
> live with that.
As I had described in
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/54dd2413.8030...@gmx.net>, this is
all but impossible. The above rule is certainly completely detached
from the reality of what people actually send in. If you are just
ignoring patches that don't match your rule set, this is not going to
work very well.
I think the old system where the patch submitter declared, this message
contains my patch, is the only one that will work.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
