"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jim Nasby wrote: >> More important, I see no reason to tie applying patches to pulling >> from CVS. In fact, I think it's a bad idea: you want to build just >> what's in CVS first, to make sure that it's working, before you start >> testing any patches against it.
> Actually, I think a patch would need to be designated against a particular > branch and timestamp, and the buildfarm member would need to "update" to > that on its temp copy before applying the patch. I think I like Jim's idea better: you want to find out if some other applied patch has broken the patch-under-test, so I cannot see a reason for testing against anything except branch tip. There certainly is value in being able to test against a non-HEAD branch tip, but I don't see the point in testing against a back timestamp. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq