Re: CF app and patch series

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CF app and patch series
Date: 2016-09-09 10:22:55
Message-ID: CABUevExTT0z5qP3Ast=CvXSuKhY4O-sSHWOEOPQigr+r7q=XcA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
wrote:

> Craig Ringer wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Now that it's becoming more common to post patch series, not just
> > standalone patches, it might be worth looking at how the CF app can
> > help manage them.
> >
> > Any ideas?
>
> I agree that we don't consider this case at all currently and that it's
> causing some pain.
>
> MIME parsing is mind-boggling. Trying to figure out *one* patch file
> from an email is already pretty difficult. Trying to figure out more
> than one might be nightmarish. Maybe Magnus will contradict me and say
> it's trivial to do -- that'd be great.
>

Nothing is ever trivial :)

Actually, the archives collect all attachments. And they're available in
the API there. But the commitfest app only keeps the first one.

So would it be trivial to collect more? Not really. Would it be
nightmarish? No, not that either.

So if we can figure out how to actually work it into the UI of the CF app,
it should certainly be doable to track multiple attachments.

> I don't have any great ideas for how to support this; I'd say it would
> be something like the CF entry has sub-entries one for each patch in the
> series, that can be closed independently. This probably involves
> surgery to the CF database and app which I'm not volunteering to write,
> however. Django-enabled contributors speak up now ...
>

Yeah, that would require a bit more surgery. Not sure how to represent it
though, if those patches are all typically sent in the same mailthread.
Which I guess they are. Because then that thread would have to be attached
to all of those sub-entries, which would kind of defeat the purpose?

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-09-09 10:54:22 Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-09-09 09:47:17 Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables