On 07/17/2012 11:08 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 17 July 2012 14:43, Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> wrote:
This seems to have broken Windows builds. (And if people need reminding,
cross-compiling is pretty easy:
<http://people.planetpostgresql.org/andrew/index.php?/archives/264-Cross-compiling-PostgreSQL-for-WIndows.html>
)
Perhaps I'm asking a naive question, but wouldn't it be easier if
people had the opportunity to use the buildfarm without actually
committing something? For example, perhaps the buildfarm could be made
to run on a staging branch. Commits would actually be made to the
staging branch. If and when the regression tests pass, the
infrastructure then pushes the staging branch commit onto the master
branch, and the commit is really committed - the -commiters list is
now informed of this. If there is a problem with the buildfarm, the
committer receives an e-mail informing them of this. The commit is
non-destructively reverted on the staging branch.
I don't know that it's worth worrying about, nor if the turnaround on
having a commit not break the buildfarm would be generally acceptable
in this situation. It would be nice to keep commit history cleaner,
though.
I don't think we have so much breakage that it would be worth the
bother. We don't use public staging branches generally, and unless
people want to start doing so for other reasons this looks like more
work than it would save.
There is provision in the buildfarm client code for some hooks that
could be used to apply and test patches. I've never used it for that but
in theory it should be possible.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers
