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

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 01:44:20
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Gavin Sherry wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jan 2007 markwkm(at)gmail(dot)com wrote:
>> 1. Pull source directly from repositories (cvs, git, etc.)  PLM
>> doesn't really track actually scm repositories.  It requires
>> directories of source code to be traversed, which are set up by
>> creating mirrors.
> It seems to me that a better approach might be to mirror the CVS repo --
> or at least make that an option -- and pull the sources locally. Having to
> pull down >100MB of data for every build might be onerous to some build
> farm members.

I am not clear about what is being proposed. Currently buildfarm syncs
against (or pulls a fresh copy from, depending on configuration) either
the main anoncvs repo or a mirror (which you can get using cvsup or rsync,
among other mechanisms). I can imagine a mechanism in which we pull
certain patches from a patch server (maybe using an RSS feed, or a SOAP
call?) which could be applied before the run. I wouldn't want to couple
things much more closely than that.

The patches would need to be vetted first, or no sane buildfarm owner will
want to use them.



In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Gavin SherryDate: 2007-01-05 02:44:56
Subject: Re: ideas for auto-processing patches
Previous:From: Gavin SherryDate: 2007-01-05 01:24:23
Subject: Re: ideas for auto-processing patches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group