From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Pg Committers <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Tips on committing |
Date: | 2018-06-28 15:20:13 |
Message-ID: | 20180628152013.3f6u3xvuggeyhtjk@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-06-28 11:14:38 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I'm not sure pgsql-committers was the right audience. Cross-posting to
> pg-hackers.
>
> On 2018-Jun-28, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > 2 Reported-by:
> > 5 Author:
> > 6 Reviewed-by:
> > 7 Tested-by:
>
> Should these include email addresses?
I'm not sure it's that helpful, they tend to be out of date pretty soon.
> I've also used "Diagnosed-by" to credit a person who spent time studying
> a bug's mechanism and how to fix it. Sometimes that's the same as
> Reported-by, but I think the weight is quite different.
Yea, same here.
> Apparently, there's a recent trend to credit patch authors using
> "Co-authored-by". Should we use that too?
> https://stackoverflow.com/a/41847267/
I just put multiple people into Authors, with order roughly implying the
amount of work. Don't really see a reason to split it off further?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-06-28 15:21:42 | Re: Tips on committing |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-06-28 15:14:38 | Re: Tips on committing |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-06-28 15:21:42 | Re: Tips on committing |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-06-28 15:14:38 | Re: Tips on committing |