On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 21:54:12 +
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 16:17 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If I had enough time there are all sorts of things like this I'd love to
set up. A fetchable url that says try these experimental CVS branches
or something
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 05:28:54PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How much time would you need? I think having every patch built before
anyone even looks at the code would sort out most of the issues I
mentioned.
If I ran a buildfarm machine, I'd turn it
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 21:47 -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 22:54 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 17:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
IMHO the thing we are really seriously short of is patch reviewers.
[...]
Well that was the basis of my original suggestion.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Treat) writes:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 16:00, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I would like to suggest that we increase substantially the FAQ entries
relating to patch submission. By we, I actually mean please could the
committers sit down and agree some
Many patch submitters discover that they fall foul of various you
should have dones at a late stage of the patch review process.
These include the usual:
- major feature change not discussed on -hackers or elsewhere first
- patch in wrong format
- performance patch, yet no performance test results
Note: People following this should probably read this post on -patches
in the archive:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-02/msg00207.php
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 05:20:55PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
Many patch submitters discover that they fall foul of various you
should have
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Finally, several of the patches committed the last few days have been
fixing minor bugs or platform specific issues with various patches. One
thing that would be really nice is a real patch queue and have the
buildfarm machines occasionally apply one of the patches
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 16:17 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If I had enough time there are all sorts of things like this I'd love to
set up. A fetchable url that says try these experimental CVS branches
or something like that would be great.
How much time would you need? I think having every
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 09:54:12PM +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 16:17 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
If I had enough time there are all sorts of things like this I'd love to
set up. A fetchable url that says try these experimental CVS branches
or something like that
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How much time would you need? I think having every patch built before
anyone even looks at the code would sort out most of the issues I
mentioned.
If I ran a buildfarm machine, I'd turn it off immediately if anyone
proposed setting up a system that would
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 17:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
IMHO the thing we are really seriously short of is patch reviewers.
Neil and Bruce and I seem to be the only ones doing that much at all,
and the main burden is falling on Bruce. More eyeballs would help
much more than throwing machines at
Tom Lane said:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How much time would you need? I think having every patch built before
anyone even looks at the code would sort out most of the issues I
mentioned.
If I ran a buildfarm machine, I'd turn it off immediately if anyone
proposed setting up a
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 16:00, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
I would like to suggest that we increase substantially the FAQ entries
relating to patch submission. By we, I actually mean please could the
committers sit down and agree some clarified written guidelines?
As I remember,
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 22:54 +, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 17:28 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
IMHO the thing we are really seriously short of is patch reviewers.
[...]
Well that was the basis of my original suggestion. Publish some
guidelines and everybody becomes a patch reviewer.
14 matches
Mail list logo
