Re: [HACKERS] Add checklist item for psql completion to commitfest review

2017-02-24 Thread Robert Haas
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Jim Nasby  wrote:
> I've never messed with completion so I don't know how hard it is, but my
> impression is that it gets added after the fact not because of any
> intentional decisions but because people simply forget about it. ISTM it
> would be more efficient of community resources to deal with completion in
> the original patch, unless there's some reason not to.
>
> IOW, no, don't make it a hard requirement, but don't omit it simply through
> forgetfulness.

Because our biggest problem around here is that it's too easy to get
patches committed, so we should add some more requirements?

I think it's great to include tab completion support in initial
patches if people are willing to do that, but I'm not prepared to
insist on it.  Anyway, it's not just a yes-or-no thing; it's pretty
common that people go back later and add more tab completion to things
that already have some tab completion.  So if we adopt the rule you
are proposing, then the next question will be whether a given patch
has ENOUGH tab completion.  Ugh.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Add checklist item for psql completion to commitfest review

2017-02-23 Thread Jim Nasby

On 2/15/17 9:49 AM, Robert Haas wrote:

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Jim Nasby  wrote:

After seeing Yet Another Missing Psql Tab Completion it occurred to me...
why not add a checklist item to the commitfest review page? I realize most
regular contributors don't use the form, but a fair number of people do. I
don't see how it could hurt.

Another possible idea is a git hook that checks to see if the psql
completion code has been touched if any of the grammar has been. That could
certainly trigger false positives so it'd need to be easy to over-ride, but
AFAIK that could be done via a special phrase in the commit message.


In the past, our usual policy has been that tab completion isn't a
hard requirement for a patch implementing a new feature.  It often
gets added after the fact.  I think that policy has worked fine, but
it's not a bad thing for people to include tab completion in the
original patch either, if they have the brain space for it.


I've never messed with completion so I don't know how hard it is, but my 
impression is that it gets added after the fact not because of any 
intentional decisions but because people simply forget about it. ISTM it 
would be more efficient of community resources to deal with completion 
in the original patch, unless there's some reason not to.


IOW, no, don't make it a hard requirement, but don't omit it simply 
through forgetfulness.

--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Add checklist item for psql completion to commitfest review

2017-02-15 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Jim Nasby  wrote:
> After seeing Yet Another Missing Psql Tab Completion it occurred to me...
> why not add a checklist item to the commitfest review page? I realize most
> regular contributors don't use the form, but a fair number of people do. I
> don't see how it could hurt.
>
> Another possible idea is a git hook that checks to see if the psql
> completion code has been touched if any of the grammar has been. That could
> certainly trigger false positives so it'd need to be easy to over-ride, but
> AFAIK that could be done via a special phrase in the commit message.

In the past, our usual policy has been that tab completion isn't a
hard requirement for a patch implementing a new feature.  It often
gets added after the fact.  I think that policy has worked fine, but
it's not a bad thing for people to include tab completion in the
original patch either, if they have the brain space for it.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers