Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up
Date: 2013-08-02 21:24:57
Message-ID: 20130802212457.GG14543@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 02:07:53PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 08/02/2013 01:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 04:43:30PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:18:15PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Right cause if a reviewer ends up writing (or cleaning up) all the
> >>>> docs, I would say they deserve very close to equal credit. As an
> >>>> example.
> >>>
> >>> I can do whatever we agree to in the release notes. The big question
> >>> is whether committers can properly document these people.
> >>
> >> I don't see why not. Most of them, if not all, already do.
>
> It is also my thinking that it is the job of the CommitFestManager to
> re-enforce this list by looking through the review list. If we do this
> on a per-CF basis, the workload won't become substantial; it's only if
> we wait until beta that it gets overwhelming.

Based on existing workflow, we need those reviewer names in the commit
message. I don't see how the CommitFestManager can help with that.

> The CFM needs to supply the list of "reviewers at the end" anyway.

Why?

> > Most items had 2-3 names, and it was widely rejected. Of course, these
> > were all reviewers, not just those that changed the code. I did not
> > have details of which reviewers changed code and which just gave
> > feedback.
>
> I think "widely rejected" is an exaggeration; a few people objected
> stenuously. And the primary objection voiced was that people who did
> "it compiles!" shouldn't get equal credit with the original author of
> the patch. Which we're not proposing to do.

Well, I had to remove it pretty quickly, so that is my recolletion.

> BTW, all of this I'm talking about the 9.4 release notes, where we have
> the opportunity to start from the first CF. There's the question of what
> to do about the *9.3* release notes, which I'll address in a seperate email.

I am worried we are talking about 9.5 as we have already committed quite
a bit to 9.4.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2013-08-02 21:25:53 Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesDirty fails to test HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY for TransactionIdIsInProgress(...)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2013-08-02 21:23:09 Re: 9.3 Reviewer Credit WAS: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up