On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 02:43:38PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 1:26 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> > wrote: > > At this point, I'm going to suggest that reviewers should be open to the > > idea of applying a submitted patch to some older Git commit in order to > > review it. If we have given feedback, then it's OK to put a patch as > > "waiting on author" and eventually boot it; but if we have not given > > feedback, and there is no reason to think that the merge conflicts some > > how make the patch fundamentally obsolete, then we should *not* set it > > Waiting on Author. After all, it is quite easy to "git checkout" a > > slightly older tree to get the patch to apply cleanly and review it > > there. > > It seems plausible that improved tooling that makes it quick and easy > to test a given patch locally could improve things for everybody. > > It's possible to do a git checkout to a slightly older tree today, of > course. But in practice it's harder than it really should be. It would > be very nice if there was an easy way to fetch from a git remote, and > then check out a branch with a given patch applied on top of the "last > known good git tip" commit. The tricky part would be systematically > tracking which precise master branch commit is the last known "good > commit" for a given CF entry. That seems doable to me.
It's not only doable, but already possible. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BhUKGLW2PnHxabF3JZGoPfcKFYRCtx%2Bhu5a5yw%3DKWy57yW5cg%40mail.gmail.com The only issue with this is that cfbot has squished all the commits into one, and lost the original commit messages (if any). I submitted patches to address that but still waiting for feedback. https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20220623193125.gb22...@telsasoft.com -- Justin
