Re: ideas for auto-processing patches

From: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>
To: Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)seespotcode(dot)net>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ideas for auto-processing patches
Date: 2007-01-11 00:44:28
Message-ID: 20070111004428.GA12217@nasby.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 08:04:41AM +0900, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> >Wouldn't there be some value to knowing whether the patch failed
> >due to
> >bitrot vs it just didn't work on some platforms out of the gate?
>
> I'm having a hard time figuring out what that value would be. How
> would that knowledge affect what's needed to fix the patch?

I was thinking that knowing it did work at one time would be useful, but
maybe that's not the case...
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-01-11 00:58:48 Re: Added the word TODO in comments
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-01-10 23:15:47 Re: installcheck vs regression DLLs