Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Branch refs/heads/REL9_1_STABLE was removed

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Branch refs/heads/REL9_1_STABLE was removed
Дата
Msg-id BANLkTi=NA-dSh0zXdnz-s65Jeiu=O0B6pQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Branch refs/heads/REL9_1_STABLE was removed  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Ответы Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Branch refs/heads/REL9_1_STABLE was removed  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> +1. Spurious branch addition shouldn't cause us much pain - we'd just remove
> the new branch. Unwanted deletion is more disruptive.

How about if we allow addition only of branches matching
/^REL_[0-9_]+_STABLE$/ and disallow deletion of all branches?  That
seems like it'd allow the one operation we will likely want to do with
any regularity (creating a new release branch once a year) without
going through hoops, while disallowing most of the problem cases.

The problem with allowing people to create branches and not remove
them is that someone might push a private branch and not be able to
get rid of it.  But if we only allow creation of branches that look
like the branches that are supposed to be there, then that shouldn't
be a danger.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: add support for logging current role (what to review?)
Следующее
От: Leonardo Francalanci
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Your Postgresql 9.2 patch