Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tqamX-007QWc-ID for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:42:41 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tqamV-00BUf8-K4 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:42:39 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1tqamV-00BUej-Aa for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:42:39 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1tqamT-001WXA-1K for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:42:38 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 527GgZT21024104; Fri, 7 Mar 2025 11:42:35 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Jelte Fennema-Nio cc: Andreas Karlsson , pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Commitfest app release on Feb 17 with many improvements In-reply-to: References: <703819.1741281033@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Jelte Fennema-Nio message dated "Fri, 07 Mar 2025 11:49:23 +0100" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <1024102.1741365755.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2025 11:42:35 -0500 Message-ID: <1024103.1741365755@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Jelte Fennema-Nio writes: > On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 at 11:26, Andreas Karlsson wrote: >> Out of curiosity: do you track which method works? I would expect >> everything to be applied with either git am or patch which can be >> applied with git apply making git apply technically unnecessary. > I think we need all of them... > - git apply is unable to apply the patch in 5272 on top of main > - git am, works with that 5272, but cannot apply any patch not created > by git format-patch (for instance 5522) > - I've been unable to get patch(1) not to return a failure if the > patch is already applied. So applying e.g. 5522 twice. git apply > handles that fine. Hm, don't you *want* a failure if the patch is already applied? regards, tom lane