Re: Probable CF bot degradation
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Probable CF bot degradation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGLarXMhoaF71RMuzueh43fW8vBWaAh_0VpLZvUYfLOmng@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Probable CF bot degradation (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Probable CF bot degradation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 21, 2022 at 1:58 AM Matthias van de Meent > <boekewurm+postgres@gmail.com> wrote: > > Would you know how long the expected bitrot re-check period for CF > > entries that haven't been updated is, or could the bitrot-checking > > queue be displayed somewhere to indicate the position of a patch in > > this queue? Also, as for the show-me-the-queue page, yeah that's a good idea and quite feasible. I'll look into that in a bit. > > Additionally, are there plans to validate commits of the main branch > > before using them as a base for CF entries, so that "bad" commits on > > master won't impact CFbot results as easy? > > How do you see this working? [Now with more coffee on board] Oh, right, I see, you're probably thinking that we could look at https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commits/master and take the most recent passing commit as a base. Hmm, interesting idea.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: