On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 08:49:09AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 12/27/20 12:44 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > >> Based on the number of concerns raised by various people over the last > >> couple of days (including myself, one point being the refactoring of > >> the ciphers taken from pgcrypto that should have been in its own > >> commit), I agree that it would be better to revert this code for now. > > OK, I will do so in the next few hours. My followup will be to: > > > > * register it for the commit-fest so it gets cfbot and other visibility > > * modify pgcrypto to use the new AES API (the SHA512 call no longer exists) > > * develop TAP tests, though as I mentioned, they will be odd > > > > Bruce > > I think this is a wise course. > > The cfbot and the vanilla buildfarm can't test some things easily, and > this might be such a case. That's where custom buildfarm modules can > prove useful. For example, we have one that is used by rhinoceros to run > the SEPgsql tests. ISTM this might well be another case. I can work with > you to develop such a module.
Oh, wow, I never considered that would be possible. I think we are OK not having automation of the Yubikey and AWS scripts, since they are small and rarely change. I think we can get the rest done with normal buildfarm members. I am going to use the pg_upgrade TAP test as an example since it has similar requirements and prior to its creation, I did my own testing of that. I am not sure how to test prompting from /dev/tty. Seems I am behind the times in learning how to write TAP tests and use the buildfarm cfbot testing properly. -- Bruce Momjian <[email protected]> https://momjian.us EnterpriseDB https://enterprisedb.com The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee
