| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: commitfest.postgresql.org is no longer fit for purpose |
| Date: | 2024-05-17 19:59:21 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYo9YcBA0VtU0f3PxCPN=4NCR2O4-QgwM+hNo08wU3uxg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 3:51 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-05-17 at 13:12 -0400, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> > > Long time ago there was a "rule" that people submitting patches are expected
> > > to do reviews. Perhaps we should be more strict this.
> >
> > Big -1. How would we even be more strict about this? Public shaming? Withholding a commit?
>
> I think it is a good rule. I don't think that it shouldn't lead to putting
> people on the pillory or kicking their patches, but I imagine that a committer
> looking for somebody else's patch to work on could prefer patches by people
> who are doing their share of reviews.
If you give me an automated way to find that out, I'll consider paying
some attention to it. However, in order to sort the list of patches
needing review by the amount of review done by the patch author, we'd
first need to have a list of patches needing review.
And right now we don't, or at least not in any usable way.
commitfest.postgresql.org is supposed to give us that, but it doesn't.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2024-05-17 20:00:55 | Re: [PATCH] Improve amcheck to also check UNIQUE constraint in btree index. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2024-05-17 19:53:58 | Re: Propagate sanity checks of ProcessUtility() to standard_ProcessUtility()? |