Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Github commit messages to pgsql-www

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "w^3" <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: Github commit messages to pgsql-www
Date: 2011-01-26 15:56:57
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-www
Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 15:14, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> Could we do #3 but instead of moving the primary to just have
>> a hook or cron'ed task that pushes from github (or pulls from it)?

> Sure, you can do something like that, but it has the same basic
> "scalability problem" - all the repos need to be created and
> maintained on

> Plus it requires a push hook at github (because the mail scripts fire
> on receive, so it needs to be a push), which I don't think they
> support.

Personally I think there is way too much third-party crap showing up on
pgsql-committers already.  I am very close to changing my filters to
bit-bucket *everything* out of pgfoundry, and you can bet that if stuff
from github starts being allowed through, it will go straight to
/dev/null here.

What I'd like to see is a reversion to the original design wherein
commit traffic for pgfoundry projects goes to lists for those individual
projects.  As for github, people who want to watch that can watch it,
but please don't clutter pgsql-committers with it.

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2011-01-26 16:03:21
Subject: Re: Github commit messages to pgsql-www
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2011-01-26 14:22:55
Subject: Re: Github commit messages to pgsql-www

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group