| From: | Michael Banck <mbanck(at)debian(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Commitfest II CLosed |
| Date: | 2013-10-22 21:59:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20131022215948.GA13222@raptor.chemicalconnection.dyndns.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:10:09AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> writes:
> > On 21.10.2013 16:15, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> What is the alternative?
>
> > If no-one really cares enough about a patch to review it, mark it as
> > "rejected, because no-one but the patch author cares". Harsh, but that's
> > effectively what pushing to the next commitfest means anyway.
>
> Well, that could be the problem, but it's also possible that no one could
> get to it in the alloted CF timeframe. Maybe the best-qualified reviewers
> were on vacation, or maybe there were just too many patches. I could see
> bouncing a patch on this basis if it doesn't get touched for, say, two
> consecutive CFs.
Maybe it would help if patches which got punted from the last commitfest
without review were marked up in some way (red, bold) in the commitfest
app so reviewers are nudged to maybe consider picking them up first.
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-10-22 22:16:00 | tracking commit timestamps |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-10-22 21:06:05 | Re: Reasons not to like asprintf |