From: | "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Lack of urgency in 8.3 reviewing |
Date: | 2007-05-17 03:27:26 |
Message-ID: | 2e78013d0705162027t2f5329b9x6cb8f1326d957c43@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/16/07, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>
>
>
> Yep, that is part of our problem, but even items people have already
> said they _can_ review have shown little progress.
>
>
For complex patches, it might help to identify and associate a core/senior
community member in the early stages of design and development. This
member will then have enough insight into the work as it progresses and can
him/herself act as a committer and/or help the committer later.
We developed HOT in a phased manner. Had each of the incremental patches
been reviewed, I think the review process would have been much easier
and less painful. Also that would have helped us to identify any obvious
bugs/show stoppers early in the cycle and might have even generated better
ideas to do things differently.
Having said that, I fully understand the difficulties of the committers who
need to put substantial efforts in understanding the patch and guage its
overall impact.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-05-17 03:50:26 | Re: Not ready for 8.3 |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-05-17 02:37:20 | Re: Testing concurrent psql |