Thread: Others applying patch queue patches

Neil Conway wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
> > and approves it.
> 
> Hey Bruce,
> 
> does this reflect a change in the patch application procedures? (i.e. in
> the past the pgpatches list you maintained was just for patches you
> yourself intended to apply at a later date).

[ CC to hackers with Neil's approval.]

The plan while I am away is for Tom or others to apply those patches.  I
talked to Tom about this.  In fact you can always apply a patch from the
queue and I will just remove it when I see it applied.

This is a huge win for me because while I read email while I am away, I
am not around regularly enough to recover from problems after patch
application.  In the past this caused huge delays in patch application
or caused Tom to have to grovel through the email lists looking for
patches.  With this system, they are all in one place and can be applied
in a timely manner.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
>>> and approves it.
>> 
>> does this reflect a change in the patch application procedures?

In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
was ;-).  The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
entirely on Bruce.  The list he maintains is just there to ensure that
nothing slips through the cracks.
        regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Neil Conway wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 23:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
> >>> and approves it.
> >> 
> >> does this reflect a change in the patch application procedures?
> 
> In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
> was ;-).  The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
> entirely on Bruce.  The list he maintains is just there to ensure that
> nothing slips through the cracks.

Yes, I welcome others to apply patches from the queue --- in fact I
encourage it.  I think we need one person making sure no patches are
lost (that role doesn't distribute well) but we don't need to have one
person applying patches from that queue.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
 

On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
> was ;-).  The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
> entirely on Bruce.  The list he maintains is just there to ensure that
> nothing slips through the cracks.

Sounds good. Before I apply a patch from -patches, I send a mail saying
"I intend to apply the patch in xyz hours", or the like. Is the presence
of the patch on Bruce's pending patches list sufficient notice that it
is going to be applied, or should I send mail in this case as well?

-Neil

Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 13:18, Tom Lane wrote:
>> In my mind this is just a clearer statement of what the policy always
>> was ;-).  The patch review/application load was never supposed to fall
>> entirely on Bruce.  The list he maintains is just there to ensure that
>> nothing slips through the cracks.

> Sounds good. Before I apply a patch from -patches, I send a mail saying
> "I intend to apply the patch in xyz hours", or the like. Is the presence
> of the patch on Bruce's pending patches list sufficient notice that it
> is going to be applied, or should I send mail in this case as well?

I think if it was posted to -patches more than a day or so ago, and
there's been no objection, that that in itself is sufficient notice.
Bruce's patch queue is there to catch stuff that didn't get picked up
on right away --- it's not meant as a filtering mechanism, but as a
let's-not-forget-this mechanism.

Of course, this still assumes that you (or any other committer) will
review what you apply before you apply it.  Lack of objection probably
only means that no one sees a gross problem with the idea of the patch,
not that everyone's gone over it with a fine-tooth comb.  I think the
person who applies a patch is responsible for having given it a
reasonably careful line-by-line review.  (If you see any points you're
not sure about, by all means ask for backup --- you don't have to do it
alone.)
        regards, tom lane