From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up |
Date: | 2013-08-07 19:18:37 |
Message-ID: | 20130807191837.GX2706@tamriel.snowman.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh,
* Josh Berkus (josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com) wrote:
> > Actually, for me, motiving reviewers seems like the Lemon-Soaked Paper
> > Napkins, as it requires unbounded effort and its importance is not being
> > balanced with other priorities.
>
> Let me be absolutely clear here: You do not think that the work
> reviewers do is important at all, and you think that our project has
> more than enough reviewers? I want to be crystal-clear on your opinion.
Bruce certainly didn't say that and it's rather disingenuous to claim
that he did. What I read is that he simply pointed out that we have
multiple priorities and need to consider work on acquiring new
reviewers in balance with the rest.
Also mentioned is that it's unclear how one might bound the work of
getting new reviewers- you can't say "it'll take X hours to get enough
reviewers" or even "it'll take X hours to get 5 new reviewers".
Thanks,
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thom Brown | 2013-08-07 19:23:55 | Re: 9.4 regression |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-08-07 19:07:32 | Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up |