Re: New CF app deployment

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 9:46 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
>> wrote:
>> > I think the old system where the patch submitter declared, this message
>> > contains my patch, is the only one that will work.
>>
>> I tend to agree. That being said, calling out latest attachments is
>> also useful (or highlighting that a particular mail has a particular
>> file attached in general).
>>
>
> We can keep listing the attachment and just remove the automated check of
> what *kind* of attachment it is.
>

But when an email has multiple attachments, there should be some kind of
indication that this is the case.

In https://commitfest.postgresql.org/4/21/

The line:

Attachment (attlognum-test.sql
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/attachment/36971/attlognum-test.sql>)
at 2015-02-23 23:09:06
<http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/54EBB312.7090000@2ndquadrant.com/> from
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra at 2ndquadrant.com> (Patch: No)

is misleading.

Cheers,

Jeff