Re: Probable CF bot degradation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Probable CF bot degradation
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKG+jmHE9FRKLoZEMwTD7stAFttS05tX0eTRuJhDC+RRyKw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Probable CF bot degradation  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Probable CF bot degradation  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:46 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 1:58 AM Matthias van de Meent
> > <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Additionally, are there plans to validate commits of the main branch
> > > before using them as a base for CF entries, so that "bad" commits on
> > > master won't impact CFbot results as easy?
> >
> > How do you see this working?
>
> [Now with more coffee on board]  Oh, right, I see, you're probably
> thinking that we could look at
> https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commits/master and take the most
> recent passing commit as a base.  Hmm, interesting idea.

A nice case in point today: everything is breaking on Windows due to a
commit in master, which could easily be avoided by looking back a
certain distance for a passing commit from postgres/postgres to use as
a base.  Let's me see if this is easy to fix...

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220322231311.GK28503%40telsasoft.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: New Object Access Type hooks
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: SQL/JSON: functions