From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Commitfest problems |
Date: | 2014-12-11 17:02:16 |
Message-ID: | 1485.1418317336@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> On 12/11/14 1:35 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> While the commitfest process hasn't changed much and was very successful
>> in the first few years, a few things have changed externally:
>>
>> 1 more new developers involved in contributing small patches
>> 2 more full-time developers creating big patches
>> 3 increased time demands on experienced Postgres developers
> The number of patches registered in the commit fests hasn't actually
> changed over the years. It has always fluctuated between 50 and 100,
> depending on the point of the release cycle. So I don't think (1) is
> necessarily the problem.
Interesting point, but of course not all patches are equal; perhaps
the problem is that we're seeing fewer of (1) and more of (2) in the
commitfest queue. Is there any easy way to quantify the size/complexity
of the patches in past fests?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David G Johnston | 2014-12-11 17:04:43 | Re: 9.5 release scheduling (was Re: logical column ordering) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-12-11 17:01:30 | Re: double vacuum in initdb |