commitfest app bug/feature

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:

Then there is no way to remove a patch from the application. You end up
marking them as "Rejected", which does not make much sense, see the bottom
of the 2015-06 commitfest list...
Maybe a "Duplicate" status would be better, and the ability to actually
remove a stupid entry would be even nicer, although maybe not desirable, ot
sure. And/or some way to prevent duplicates based on the description...

It is possible to remove patches from the set, but administrator
rights are necessary. If there are duplicated entries that you would
like to get removed, simply mention them here and I'll remove them. I
do some cleanup of duplicate entries from time to time though, you are
not the first one to get bitten by that.
Regards,
--
Michael

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

Hello Michael,

It is possible to remove patches from the set, but administrator rights
are necessary.

Good. Maybe this right could be granted to the person who as created the
patch entry in the CF?

If there are duplicated entries that you would like to get removed,
simply mention them here and I'll remove them. I do some cleanup of
duplicate entries from time to time though, you are not the first one to
get bitten by that.

Sure.

Feel free to remove the stupid "Rejected" entries at the end of the
2015-06 CF: there are currently 11 "pgbench allow '=' in \set" (mine) and
2 "configure can't detect proper pthread flags -- fix".

--
Fabien.

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

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:

Hello Michael,

It is possible to remove patches from the set, but administrator rights
are necessary.

Good. Maybe this right could be granted to the person who as created the
patch entry in the CF?

Er, well... #blamemagnus ;)
I'm fine to do this cleanup btw.

If there are duplicated entries that you would like to get removed, simply
mention them here and I'll remove them. I do some cleanup of duplicate
entries from time to time though, you are not the first one to get bitten by
that.

Sure.

Feel free to remove the stupid "Rejected" entries at the end of the 2015-06
CF: there are currently 11 "pgbench allow '=' in \set" (mine) and 2
"configure can't detect proper pthread flags -- fix".

Done.
--
Michael

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

I'm fine to do this cleanup btw.

ISTM that an additional "Duplicate" or "To remove" status could be a tag
for admins to remove the entries?

Feel free to remove the stupid "Rejected" entries at the end of the 2015-06
CF: there are currently 11 "pgbench allow '=' in \set" (mine) and 2
"configure can't detect proper pthread flags -- fix".

Done.

Thanks.

--
Fabien.

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

On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:

I'm fine to do this cleanup btw.

ISTM that an additional "Duplicate" or "To remove" status could be a tag for
admins to remove the entries?

This looks like an overkill to me. Entries with the same description
headline mean the same thing.
--
Michael

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

ISTM that an additional "Duplicate" or "To remove" status could be a tag for
admins to remove the entries?

This looks like an overkill to me. Entries with the same description
headline mean the same thing.

Sure.

My point was to provide a mean to signal explicitely that an entry can be
removed, as removing it is not an option for the lay man, and all other
status do not correspond to reality (Why put Rejected or Returned with
feedback, as it is not the case in?). Morover the description if different
submitions might be slightly different.

ISTM that sending a mail to hacker to remove spurious entries in the CF
app is a little overkill too.

--
Fabien.

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

On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> wrote:

Hello,

Some comments/bug report about the commitfest web app which just bite me:-)

When creating a patch with the commitfest app, if the thread does not
exist the application seems to reject the creation, so you may resubmit
because you know the thread is going to exist soon... Well, this is a bad
idea:-)

Indeed the first submission, although it looked like it had failed, has
really been created anyway, and the resubmission creates another entry. If
you click again, you get a third. And so on.

Clearly I'm very slow at some things, but at least I've just pushed a fix
for this bug now. It validates the thread exists *before* it creates the
entry now...

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/