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

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: Probable CF bot degradation
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKGLarXMhoaF71RMuzueh43fW8vBWaAh_0VpLZvUYfLOmng@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  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
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:
> > Would you know how long the expected bitrot re-check period for CF
> > entries that haven't been updated is, or could the bitrot-checking
> > queue be displayed somewhere to indicate the position of a patch in
> > this queue?

Also, as for the show-me-the-queue page, yeah that's a good idea and
quite feasible.  I'll look into that in a bit.

> > 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.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Probable CF bot degradation
Next
From: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Date:
Subject: Re: Tab completion for SET TimeZone