From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: No answers on CommitFest procedures? |
Date: | 2008-07-09 18:30:19 |
Message-ID: | 200807091130.21149.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavan,
> I think we should. For example, one of the WIP patches is submitted by
> me. One reason I marked it WIP because I was not sure what is
> considered as WIP and what is not. The patch is ready for review, but
> of course have some open items and may need further work once I
> receive the feedback. But I can not make progress either before the
> current work is reviewed, either at the code level or design level. I
> expect that feedback during this commit fest.
I guess the problem I'm having is that people are using various statuses,
but there's no clear indication what they mean. Currently on the
commitfest we have:
Pending Review
WIP
Waiting on Response
Proof of Concept
And for the non-committer reviewers, we'll probably need "Ready for
Committer" as well. I thing we need to restrict the list of statuses to a
coherent list, and have definitions for each.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2008-07-09 18:32:37 | Re: [PATCHES] GIN improvements |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2008-07-09 18:28:08 | Re: CommitFest: how does handoff work for non-committer reviewers? |