From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(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 02:32:28 |
Message-ID: | 200907020232.n622WSn04266@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.
"I don't promise it would be pleasant."
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-07-02 02:33:05 | Re: 8.5 development schedule |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2009-07-02 02:31:56 | Re: 8.5 development schedule |