From: | Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Subject: | Re: Clarifying Commitfest policies |
Date: | 2022-08-04 18:38:29 |
Message-ID: | CAAWbhmg9hcJjTQe=854kbFgTSrreFwAOK89mtYRVw3VL7w1VSA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 2:05 PM Matthias van de Meent
<boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 at 20:04, Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
> > Is that enough, or should we do more?
>
> "The CF Checklist" seems to refer to only the page that is (or seems
> to be) intended for the CFM only. We should probably also update the
> pages of "Commitfest", "Submitting a patch", "Reviewing a Patch", "So,
> you want to be a developer?", and the "Developer FAQ" page, which
> doesn't have to be more than removing outdated information and
> refering to any (new) documentation on how to participate in the
> PostgreSQL development and/or Commitfest workflow as a non-CFM.
Agreed, a sweep of those materials would be helpful as well. I'm
personally focused on CFM tasks, since it's fresh in my brain and
documentation is almost non-existent for it, but if you have ideas for
those areas, I definitely don't want to shut down that line of the
conversation.
> Additionally, we might want to add extra text to the "developers"
> section of the main website [0] to refer to any new documentation.
> This suggestion does depend on whether the new documentation has a
> high value for potential community members.
Right. So what kinds of info do we want to highlight in this
documentation, to make it high-quality?
Drawing from some of the questions I've seen recently, we could talk about
- CF "power" structure (perhaps simply to highlight that the CFM has
no additional authority to get patches in)
- the back-and-forth process on the mailing list, maybe including
expected response times
- what to do when a patch is returned (or rejected)
> As an example, the GitHub mirror of the main PostgreSQL repository
> receives a decent amount of pull request traffic. When a project has a
> CONTRIBUTING.md -file at the top level people writing the pull request
> message will be pointed to those contributing guidelines. This could
(I think some text got cut here.)
The mirror bot will point you to the "So, you want to be a developer?"
wiki when you open a PR, but I agree that a CONTRIBUTING doc would
help prevent that small embarrassment.
--Jacob
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-08-04 19:02:10 | Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade |
Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2022-08-04 18:19:28 | Re: [PATCH] CF app: add "Returned: Needs more interest" |