Re: Probable CF bot degradation

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Probable CF bot degradation
Date: 2022-03-22 23:44:09
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+jmHE9FRKLoZEMwTD7stAFttS05tX0eTRuJhDC+RRyKw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:46 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 1:58 AM Matthias van de Meent
> > <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > Additionally, are there plans to validate commits of the main branch
> > > before using them as a base for CF entries, so that "bad" commits on
> > > master won't impact CFbot results as easy?
> >
> > How do you see this working?
>
> [Now with more coffee on board] Oh, right, I see, you're probably
> thinking that we could look at
> https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commits/master and take the most
> recent passing commit as a base. Hmm, interesting idea.

A nice case in point today: everything is breaking on Windows due to a
commit in master, which could easily be avoided by looking back a
certain distance for a passing commit from postgres/postgres to use as
a base. Let's me see if this is easy to fix...

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220322231311.GK28503%40telsasoft.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-03-22 23:48:55 Re: SQL/JSON: functions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-03-22 23:36:50 Re: New Object Access Type hooks