| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.5 development schedule |
| Date: | 2009-07-02 02:29:32 |
| Message-ID: | 16742.1246501772@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> There has been discussion about how to be more hard-nosed about
> rejecting patches. I think it has to start with us being more
> hard-nosed about giving patches feedback --- the very idea we had to
> create commit-fests reflects that we historically have not done an
> organized job of processing patches.
> If we review patches as soon as they appear, and give rapid feedback, we
> can easily reject patches that take more than a few days for the patch
> author to resolve, and there would be little slippage; the same goes
> for dealing with known bugs. I know it can be done, but I don't promise
> it would be pleasant.
In other words, you propose dropping the idea of commitfests, and
expecting committers to spend *all* their time reviewing? Tain't
happening.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-07-02 02:29:58 | Re: HEAD is open for 8.5 development |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-07-02 02:25:41 | Re: gin--a rule for function parameter |