On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote:
On 2/14/15 7:30 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com > Can we make it smarter, so that the kinds of things people produce > intending for them to be patches are thought by the CF app to be > patches? > > > Doing it wouldn't be too hard, as the code right now is simply: > > # Attempt to identify the file using magic information > mtype = mag.buffer(contents) > if mtype.startswith('text/x-diff'): > a.ispatch = True > else: > a.ispatch = False > > > (where mag is the API call into the magic module) > > So we could easily add for example our own regexp parsing or so. The > question is do we want to - because we'll have to maintain it as well. > But I guess if we have a restricted enough set of rules, we can probably > live with that.
As I had described in <http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/54DD2413.8030201@gmx.net>, this is all but impossible. The above rule is certainly completely detached from the reality of what people actually send in. If you are just ignoring patches that don't match your rule set, this is not going to work very well.
I think the old system where the patch submitter declared, this message contains my patch, is the only one that will work.
Would you suggest removing the automated system completely, or keep it around and just make it possible to override it (either by removing the note that something is a patch, or by making something that's not listed as a patch become marked as such)?