Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy
Date
Msg-id 30214.1496250801@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy  (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>)
Re: [HACKERS] TAP backpatching policy  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> My main concern is how widely is the buildfarm going to test the new
> test frameworks.  If we backpatch PostgresNode-based tests to 9.2, are
> buildfarm animals going to need to be reconfigured to use
> --enable-tap-tests?

Yes.  The animals that are doing it at all are using code more or less
like this:

if ($branch eq 'HEAD' or $branch ge 'REL9_4')
{   push(@{$conf{config_opts}},"--enable-tap-tests");
}

(verbatim from longfin's config script)

So maybe that's an argument for not going back before 9.4.  OTOH,
you may be giving the buildfarm owners too little credit for
willingness to update their configurations.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] relocation truncated to fit: citus build failure on s390x
Next
From: Dilip Kumar
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] <> join selectivity estimate question