Hi On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Atira Odhner <aodh...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Certainly. We did mention the dependency in the email. Would it be better > to mention it in the patch name?
I think the problem was that the way you phrased it, it sounded optional ("an updated patch which does not include adding that test helper in case you apply the show-tables patch first"). I think a clear "This patch is dependent on patch Foo" would suffice. > Is there a better way for us to manage > these changes? On other open source projects, I've seen github mirrors set > up so that changes can be pulled in like branches rather then as patch > applies. That would have avoided this situation since the parent commit > would be pulled in with the same SHA from either pull request branch and git > would not see it as a conflict. > > I'm rather new to dealing with patch files like this so I would love some > tips. The Postgres project in general is quite conservative and stuck in it's ways about how things are done (which is usually a good thing considering you trust your data to the resulting code). We're used to dealing with larger patchsets via the mailing list - typically as long as you're clear about any dependencies, it shouldn't be a problem. Some of us use tools like PyCharms for handling patches and helping with reviews etc. which I guess replaces most, if not all of the GitHub functionality over plain git. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers