Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management

Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> It was written and submitted by one person who did not bother to ask
>> first whether anyone else thought it was worthwhile. So its presence
>> on the CF list should not be taken as evidence that there's consensus
>> for it.

> Should we have "Needs Discussion" phase before "Needs Review" ?
> Reviews, including me, think patches with needs-review status are
> worthwhile. In contrast, contributers often register their patches
> to CF without discussions just because of no response; they cannot
> find whether no response is silent approval or not.

Hm, I guess the question would be: what is the condition for getting
out of that state? It's clear who is supposed to move a patch out of
'Needs Review', 'Waiting for Author', or 'Ready for Committer'
respectively. I don't know who's got the authority to decide that
something has or has not achieved community consensus.

Right at the moment we handle this sort of problem in a very informal
way, but if it's going to become part of the commitfest state for a
patch I think we need to be a bit less informal.

regards, tom lane