From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: How to submit a patch |
Date: | 2008-04-16 20:15:05 |
Message-ID: | 200804162015.m3GKF5g09110@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Based on my observations, there's basically three different workflows a
> patch can follow (assuming the patch gets committed in the end):
>
> Workflow A:
>
> 1. You post patch to pgsql-patches
> 2. a committer picks it up immediately, and commits it.
>
> Workflow B:
>
> 1. You post a patch to pgsql-patches
> 2. You add a link to the wiki page of the next commit fest
> 3. A committer picks up the patch from the wiki page, and commits it
>
> Workflow C:
>
> 1. You post a patch to pgsql-patches
> 2. Bruce adds the patch to the unapplied patches queue after a while
> 3. At the beginning of the next commit fest, Alvaro (with the help from
> others, I hope) goes through the patches queue, and puts a link to the
> wiki page of the next commit fest
> 4. A committer picks up the patch from the wiki page, and commits it
Yep, that's pretty accurate.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2008-04-16 20:19:49 | Re: How to submit a patch |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-16 20:11:13 | Re: How to submit a patch |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Brendan Jurd | 2008-04-16 20:19:49 | Re: How to submit a patch |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-04-16 20:11:13 | Re: How to submit a patch |