On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:48 AM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 17:11 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: >> Contributors, >> >> While going through this mailing list looking for missing 9.4 patches, I >> realized that we don't track backpatches (that is, fixes to prior >> versions) at all anywhere. Where backpatches are submitted by >> committers this isn't an issue, but we had a couple major ones (like the >> autovacuum fix) which were submitted by general contributors. The same >> goes for beta fixes. >> >> Should we add a "prior version" category to the CF to make sure these >> don't get dropped? Or do something else? > > A separate commit fest for tracking proposed backpatches might be > useful.
The CF app was and is specifically for dealing with CFs. Having it deal with backpatches makes it, well, a bugtracker. It's not meant to be that. If we want a bugtracker, then it has very different requirements. Having an always-open CF would defeat the workflow. But since those patches are typically going into HEAD as well, why not just a commitfest *topic* for it, on whatever commitfest happens to be the open one? Then it'll get processed within the existing workflow. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
