From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Volunteering as Commitfest Manager |
Date: | 2011-05-25 14:32:09 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTikUOny4hUpV8ySkP43u00PbaE8Svw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> I hear that CF manager is a difficult role for a single individual.
>> So it makes sense to split that role between multiple people.
>
>> I volunteer to be the CF manager for Replication, and also for
>> Performance. ...
>> Patches need an eventual committer anyway, so this is a reasonable way
>> of having the process be managed by the eventual committer.
>
> ISTM that we really want the CF manager to be somebody who is *not*
> directly involved in reviewing or committing patches. It's a distinct
> skill set, so there is no reason why it's a good idea for a committer
> to do it. And we need to get the CF work load more spread out, not more
> concentrated.
I agree it makes sense if a non-committer performs the role. If a
committer does take the role, I would volunteer to split the role and
for me to work on the suggested areas.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-05-25 14:35:24 | Re: Reducing overhead of frequent table locks |
Previous Message | Leonardo Francalanci | 2011-05-25 14:29:05 | Re: use less space in xl_xact_commit patch |