Re: new commitfest transition guidance

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: new commitfest transition guidance
Date: 2025-02-06 00:29:35
Message-ID: 953674.1738801775@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
> Evidently this new policy is why my skip scan patch series wasn't
> being tested by CI.

Well no, the reason CI wasn't testing anything was the cfbot was
broken. See nearby "CFBot is broken" thread.

> I just don't think that this new policy makes sense. At least not as
> implemented.

I'm a little dubious about it too, but let's not conflate this
question with plain ol' infrastructure bugs.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Euler Taveira 2025-02-06 00:39:05 Re: Separate GUC for replication origins
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-02-06 00:14:14 Re: new commitfest transition guidance