| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: cfbot wrangling (was Re: Add checkpoint and redo LSN to LogCheckpointEnd log message) |
| Date: | 2022-01-12 06:52:00 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGL1zcQj0VM_-uxNUOTFv7W0LNjvaV13cYTFSTS_6xH4qg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 7:37 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 01:19:22AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> 2. You are attaching some random files, and would like to not
> >> displace the cfbot's idea of the latest patchset.
>
> > I'm assuming that someone wanting to send an additional patch to be applied on
> > top of the OP patchset is part of 2?
>
> AFAIK, if you're submitting a patch then you have to attach a complete
> patchset, or the cfbot will be totally lost. Getting the bot to
> understand incremental patches would be useful for sure ... but it's
> outside the scope of what I'm asking for now, which is just clear
> documentation of what the bot can do already.
By way of documentation, I've just now tried to answer these question
in the new FAQ at:
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-01-12 06:55:16 | Re: [PATCH] Proof of concept for GUC improvements |
| Previous Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-01-12 06:50:36 | Re: cfbot wrangling (was Re: Add checkpoint and redo LSN to LogCheckpointEnd log message) |