> On 19 May 2025, at 6:10 PM, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 6:23 AM Aleksander Alekseev
> <aleksander@timescale.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
>
>
What would help new comers I think is having some recipes to work with git the pg-hackers way:
Not many devs use format-patch and share files any more;
instead they `git checkout -b` and submitt a PR which is usually merged / squash merged.
Even “rebasing” is not as popular a term as one would hope.
In fact, I think what would help is providing some potential “copy rebase command” tooltip for the “Needs rebase
status”,
similar to the “copy git checkout commands”
