From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <me(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: Make cfbot fail on patches not created by "git format-patch" |
Date: | 2025-05-19 15:10:19 |
Message-ID: | CAOYmi+kdvgZTpVne+LeZoyuZ43cYrKvhVeBc=9jhhDfTZjn4Ng@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 6:23 AM Aleksander Alekseev
<aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
> In my experience people who have been contributing for some time use
> format-patch and provide at least a draft of the commit message,
> because they know it's more convenient both for the reviewers (the
> patch has better chances to be reviewed and tested), and for the
> authors to rebase the patch after a while. Newcomers sometimes submit
> patches that don't even target the `master` branch, and they don't
> know we have cfbot.
While I don't necessarily disagree with these two endpoints, I also
think there are a number of contributors who occupy a spot somewhere
in between -- and there were _many_ people at the unconference session
who were interested in automatically communicating our community norms
in some way. I think that's enough motivation to try something like
Jelte's latest "quality check" proposal.
--Jacob
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2025-05-19 15:19:48 | Re: Make wal_receiver_timeout configurable per subscription |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2025-05-19 15:05:30 | Re: Add comment explaining why queryid is int64 in pg_stat_statements |