On 09/20/2014 12:23 AM, Craig Ringer wrote: > On 09/20/2014 12:38 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: > >> I would not (nor do I feel that I did..) have committed it over a >> specific request to not do so from another committer. I had been hoping >> that there would be another review coming from somewhere, but there is >> always a trade-off between waiting longer to get a review ahead of a >> commit and having it committed and then available more easily for others >> to work with, review, and generally moving forward. > > Y'know what helps with that? Publishing clean git branches for > non-trivial work, rather than just lobbing patches around. > > I'm finding the reliance on a patch based workflow increasingly > frustrating for complex work, and wonder if it's time to revisit > introducing a git repo+ref to the commitfest app. > > I find the need to find the latest patch on the list, apply it, and fix > it up really frustrating. "git am --3way" helps a lot, but only if the > patch is created with "git format-patch". > > Perhaps it's time to look at whether git can do more to help us with the > testing and review process.
We discussed this at the last developer meeting, without coming up with a written procedure. Your ideas can help ... -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
