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 1trqaa-00AG7K-22 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 03:47:32 +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 1trqaY-006JVd-QI for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 03:47:30 +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 1trqaY-006JVU-GJ for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 03:47:30 +0000 Received: from mail-yw1-x1136.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1136]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1trqaW-0029IK-23 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2025 03:47:29 +0000 Received: by mail-yw1-x1136.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6fece18b3c8so25571257b3.3 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2025 20:47:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1741664848; x=1742269648; darn=lists.postgresql.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=zQW0+6iNYeZsRuzTM5nqkIijAABxnmSQ+0b9aAdUIow=; b=mX51SNignYbFNiDEtZVnqDeICWqZiU64JN6ZP+4youjhD34nwgYVjCrQwV+V+4NE9A tEEq5GTftx/Fg3/ZEqqTmaL+v3C8ckxZrkSf+Rx1cyJFJ2ok3BT5AdKd5giUfUPXFaRQ 05DpoqRWMBgnakPWHjMW1EJdGbZmV58S4YR+BuFgxtcbu+NHctBQM0LQZWVT52gyboGg QkIOGTbvCxaa5t7QoDKxXln89mW+7qqVyRkC+DHCabl930jTw2dyq4bobDihFKtzveyQ efV6yhCosGRrPzC25uv24iDytOF4R7ftny60IEDV3Ys4dhzEkeIN2fTRotSdLn7hIK+D lIKQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1741664848; x=1742269648; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=zQW0+6iNYeZsRuzTM5nqkIijAABxnmSQ+0b9aAdUIow=; b=QZughJ4iZ/7OlKrEJjxI0Llg+exNzPILg2tXWzs/1XBCyZs8YgG/4isBVjAXfK0eWL c3cYrAEOlQ1IB2/sTW0XMMAIlxvbz8pPdxQYo+kCQj26IwTllDppxKufun2UmYi8j/y6 PCJ8iiW82gZ7PqASA/G+50M1mAZwSQ2zwZ47Yuw1auxKakkNlMaJZyYlty7ljCUTcYix rEz+yWxcFH8g7o9GbKwXDOaR/Y1DucmUaWivNi4mhnqN6Qv7Pmf74WJS0yX4M0KD0T66 LK3YRKTIBu+WRycHulD7JOoPGYrLXUNa3HKRDJ1Pv1gRflW7REbZ02eMngmIHrHsyAMq VWOA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzi+9nlpEydI4CdhW+JnEf9kPtJBMKq4OuxQrT2Z9tKyQiS30O4 xgf/EBOzJgVA0QbInTWDbCAJttJrM4GHYS/CpIFdtAt5rcP7IybSCacIBiDzlI6tyIx10f2hGFV s04c+DRmOFccE4I+ZCWTLdo0+Fas= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncs1/vESIyFdXp4xJ+IhuwuITTtuoIZhMq9tTxEiab3dN+tXdCtuw+O74ialtMR nwOsn9rRNsPR1BHtxuwlZdFKDrkR5W4DUNVOU5SEeJ8FUHFKSyQEwGWJFcnfPD7BjefgjDP64Ud SXna4qACg6ObbKqiiMIUCXOCz0Vhzt X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFmPNIQ4ZoKXHYq2c5mTLw3ko1jHthbL/xZYl6X9u7lT7d4P8XxQRJVDnCkZvq7LoZn4xNIsVouEPZTeYkTpks= X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:67c7:b0:6f9:b12b:8943 with SMTP id 00721157ae682-6febf2f3a9bmr224863207b3.19.1741664847939; Mon, 10 Mar 2025 20:47:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: vignesh C Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:17:16 +0530 X-Gm-Features: AQ5f1JrJvacTOovIK-fN0NUzphx7ugz-BM4Alo9ExUuw66ZUhM5YEYcwWVCzsqU Message-ID: Subject: Re: Commitfest app release on Feb 17 with many improvements To: Jelte Fennema-Nio Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers , Jacob Brazeal Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 19:05, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote: > > On Sun, 9 Mar 2025 at 03:21, vignesh C wrote: > > Couple of suggestions: a) No need to show CI status as "Needs rebase," > > "Not processed," etc., for committed patches. > > Do you mean specifically for committed ones? Or just for any patch > with a "closed" status. It is for any closed status patches. > > b) Can we add a filter > > for "Needs rebase!"? This would help the CommitFest manager easily > > list patches that need updating. > > That should be pretty easy to implement. But is that really what we > want? In the next release, sorting by "failing since" is implemented. > It sounds like that could be enough instead. i.e. do we really only > want to call out patches that need a rebase? Or also ones that have > been failing in CI for a long time? > > I'm even wondering if this whole flow still makes sense. Do we really > want to send an email to the mailing list about this? And if so, why > is someone doing that manually? If people subscribe to updates for > patches that they authored, then they get these "needs rebase" > automatically. Should we maybe simply default that option to true? And > for instance send a notification automatically to all people with a > "needs rebase" CI status whenever we start a new commitfest. It will be good if you can send a notification automatically to the patch requiring a rebase when the CFBot first identifies this(not only during the start of commitfest) and probably send this notification once in a day for 3 or so days and then change the status to "waiting on author" if a new rebased version is not posted in this time. Regards, Vignesh