On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 02:43:38PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 1:26 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@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.GB22452@telsasoft.com
--
Justin