| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: next CommitFest |
| Date: | 2009-11-12 18:45:58 |
| Message-ID: | 1258051558.5135.97.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:36 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> I agree. I would quibble only with the details. I think we should
> require patch authors to act as a reviewer for any CommitFest for
> which they have submitted patches. We don't need every patch author
> to review as many patches as they submit, because some people will
> review extras, and some non-patch-authors will review. If they review
> one patch each, that's probably more than enough. It's also easier
> for bookkeeping purposes.
Not all contributors are fluent English readers and writers.
I certainly do not discourage those people from reviewing, but I can
understand how it might be more frustrating and less productive for
them. An important part of review is to read the relevant mailing list
threads and try to tie up loose ends and find a consensus.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-12 18:46:42 | Re: array_to_string bug? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-11-12 18:40:38 | Re: plpgsql GUC variable: custom or built-in? |