On 23/07/2018 05:58, Tom Lane wrote:
> 013f320dc reminds me of something I check for religiously: look for
> alternative output files for any regression test you're updating the
> output of.
>
> Actually updating said files, once you notice you need to, can be tricky
> in itself. Most of the time
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> You've convinced me that we should definitely have such a list. I've
> put it on my TODO list.
I started this Wiki page:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Committing_checklist
I've tried to avoid being too prescriptive. This is a work in
Noah Misch writes:
> I agree we won't all want the exact same checklist. Still, it wouldn't hurt
> to have a wiki page of checklist entry ideas from which folks cherry-pick the
> entries they like.
013f320dc reminds me of something I check for religiously: look for
alternative output files for a
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:14 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
> My rule has been to add to my private checklist anytime I mail or push a patch
> containing a readily-checkable mistake. I go through the checklist before
> mailing or pushing any patch. It has things in common with your list, plus
> these:
>
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:52:42AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> >> FWIW, I developed a document on committing for my own reference, with
> >> some help from Andres.
My rule has been to add to my private checklist anytime I mail or push
On 2018-Jul-02, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Do a dry run before really pushing by using --dry-run.
>
> In addition to this, I'd recommend using 'git show' on the results of
> the --dry-run, so that you see what you're really about to push.
Since commit 653530c8b196 I use this little script I borr
Greetings,
* Peter Geoghegan (p...@bowt.ie) wrote:
> FWIW, I developed a document on committing for my own reference, with
> some help from Andres. A lot of it is about commit message style, the
> use of fields, and so on. But I've also developed a check list for
> committing, knowing that there a
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 06:02:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 09:46:17AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> * Don't assume that you haven't broken the doc build if you make even
>> a trivial doc change. Removing a GUC can break instances in the
>> release notes where they'r
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 09:46:17AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> * Don't assume that you haven't broken the doc build if you make even
> a trivial doc change. Removing a GUC can break instances in the
> release notes where they're referenced. Even grep can miss this, since
> references to the GUC
On 06/29/2018 02:19 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:04:07PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 6/28/18 17:14, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
2 Reported-by:
5 Author:
6 Reviewed-by:
7 Tested-by:
Should these include email addresses?
One reason I include
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:52:42AM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> I'll try to do that, but I'd still recommend personalizing it. A lot
> of the stuff in there is specific to my own workflow and tool
> preferences, and my own personal working style.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:04:07PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 6/28/18 17:14, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>> 2 Reported-by:
>>> 5 Author:
>>> 6 Reviewed-by:
>>> 7 Tested-by:
>> Should these include email addresses?
>
> One reason I include emails is that sometimes the na
On 6/28/18 17:14, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> 2 Reported-by:
>> 5 Author:
>> 6 Reviewed-by:
>> 7 Tested-by:
> Should these include email addresses?
One reason I include emails is that sometimes the names are spelled in
inconsistent ways or don't include ASCII characters at all
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>> FWIW, I developed a document on committing for my own reference, with
>> some help from Andres.
>
> Sounds very useful.
>
> How about turning it into a wiki page, for everybody's benefit?
I'll try to do that, but I'd still recommend person
On 2018-Jun-28, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Good point. I have never used it but I can see its value. I have added
> > it to my template.
>
> FWIW, I developed a document on committing for my own reference, with
> some help from Andres.
S
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 8:21 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Good point. I have never used it but I can see its value. I have added
> it to my template.
FWIW, I developed a document on committing for my own reference, with
some help from Andres. A lot of it is about commit message style, the
use of
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:20 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> Apparently, there's a recent trend to credit patch authors using
>> "Co-authored-by". Should we use that too?
>> https://stackoverflow.com/a/41847267/
>
> I just put multiple people into Authors, with order roughly implying the
> amount of
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:14:38AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'm not sure pgsql-committers was the right audience. Cross-posting to
> pg-hackers.
>
> On 2018-Jun-28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > 2 Reported-by:
> > 5 Author:
> > 6 Reviewed-by:
> > 7 Tested-by:
>
> Shoul
On 2018-06-28 11:14:38 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'm not sure pgsql-committers was the right audience. Cross-posting to
> pg-hackers.
>
> On 2018-Jun-28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > 2 Reported-by:
> > 5 Author:
> > 6 Reviewed-by:
> > 7 Tested-by:
>
> Should these incl
I'm not sure pgsql-committers was the right audience. Cross-posting to
pg-hackers.
On 2018-Jun-28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 2 Reported-by:
> 5 Author:
> 6 Reviewed-by:
> 7 Tested-by:
Should these include email addresses?
I've also used "Diagnosed-by" to credit a person who
20 matches
Mail list logo
