Re: ideas for auto-processing patches

From: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ideas for auto-processing patches
Date: 2007-01-05 03:34:41
Message-ID: 4078.24.211.165.134.1167968081.squirrel@www.dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gavin Sherry wrote:
>
> With PLM, you could test patches against various code branches. I'd
> guessed Mark would want to provide this capability. Pulling branches from
> anonvcvs regularly might be burdensome bandwidth-wise. So, like you say, a
> local mirror would be beneficial for patch testing.

I think you're missing the point. Buildfarm members already typically have
or can get very cheaply a copy of each branch they build (HEAD and/or
REL*_*_STABLE). As long as the patch feed is kept to just patches which
they can apply there should be no great bandwidth issues.

>
>> The patches would need to be vetted first, or no sane buildfarm owner
>> will
>> want to use them.
>
> It would be nice if there could be a class of trusted users whose patches
> would not have to be vetted.
>
>

Beyond committers?

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-01-05 03:38:18 Re: InitPostgres and flatfiles question
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-01-05 03:28:46 Re: 8.3 pending patch queue