Re: ideas for auto-processing patches - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: ideas for auto-processing patches
Date
Msg-id 45A7C084.60407@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ideas for auto-processing patches  (markwkm@gmail.com)
Responses Re: ideas for auto-processing patches  (markwkm@gmail.com)
List pgsql-hackers
markwkm@gmail.com wrote:
> What do you think about setting up the buildfarm clients
> with the users they are willing to test patches for, as opposed to
> having the patch system track who is are trusted users?  My thoughts
> are the former is easier to implement and that it allows anyone to use
> the buildfarm to test a patch for anyone, well each buildfarm client
> user permitting.

We can do this, but the utility will be somewhat limited. The submitters 
will still have to be known and authenticated on the patch server. I 
think you're also overlooking one of the virtues of the buildfarm, 
namely that it does its thing unattended. If there is a preconfigured 
set of submitters/vetters then we can rely on them all to do their 
stuff. If it's more ad hoc, then when Joe Bloggs submits a spiffy new 
patch every buildfarm owner that wanted to test it would need to go and 
add him to their configured list of patch submitters. This doesn't seem 
too workable.

cheers

andrew



>
> Regards,
> Mark
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at
>
>                http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
>



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: markwkm@gmail.com
Date:
Subject: Re: ideas for auto-processing patches
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Checkpoint request failed on version 8.2.1.