| From: | Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Albert Cervera i Areny <albert(at)nan-tic(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: next CommitFest |
| Date: | 2009-11-13 05:53:19 |
| Message-ID: | 4AFCF44F.107@cheapcomplexdevices.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
>
> That wasn't my intention. I really was assuming that we would just
> let those patches drop on the floor, and that they would not be picked
> up either by reviewers or committers.
Surely it should depend on the nature of the patch.
For an extreme strawman, segfault fixes almost certainly shouldn't
be dropped. Same for docs patches that clarify the product. I
think the majority of my contributions to open source this decade
have been of that nature (a few links to examples in postgres and
postgis follow).
Maybe a better policy would be:
"if you reviewed patches, a reviewer will be assigned -- if
you didn't, your patch is at the mercy of reviewers volunteering
to review it based on their own interest in your patch"
that way patches that the community really wants could get in anyway.
http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-users/2005-April/007762.html
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2009-03/msg00252.php
http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-users/2005-April/007704.html
http://postgis.refractions.net/pipermail/postgis-devel/2005-April/001341.html
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Hodges | 2009-11-13 06:07:57 | Re: write ahead logging in standby (streaming replication) |
| Previous Message | KaiGai Kohei | 2009-11-13 05:34:07 | Re: [PATCH] SE-PgSQL/lite (r2429) |