From: | Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Commitfest overflow |
Date: | 2021-08-03 18:32:50 |
Message-ID: | CALtqXTdeaScBH9m6P57p3Gn-t4-+Ezvb34GbmCemA5TWvaAmZA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 9:13 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> >> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> >> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
> > I wonder if our lack of in-person developer meetings is causing some of
> > our issues to not get closed.
>
> I think there are a couple of things happening here:
>
> 1. There wasn't that much getting done during this CF because it's
> summer and many people are on vacation (in the northern hemisphere
> anyway).
>
> 2. As a community, we don't really have the strength of will to
> flat-out reject patches. I think the dynamic is that individual
> committers look at something, think "I don't like that, I'll go
> work on some better-designed patch", and it just keeps slipping
> to the next CF. In the past we've had some CFMs who were assertive
> enough and senior enough to kill off patches that didn't look like
> they were going to go anywhere. But that hasn't happened for
> awhile, and I'm not sure it should be the CFM's job anyway.
>
> (I hasten to add that I'm not trying to imply that all the
> long-lingering patches are hopeless. But I think some of them are.)
>
> I don't think there's much to be done about the vacation effect;
> we just have to accept that the summer CF is likely to be less
> productive than others. But I'd like to see some better-formalized
> way of rejecting patches that aren't going anywhere. Maybe there
> should be a time limit on how many CFs a patch is allowed to just
> automatically slide through?
>
+1 for the idea of allowed CFs. Secondly we can think about the patches
which
have not had a response from the author since long.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
>
--
Ibrar Ahmed
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ibrar Ahmed | 2021-08-03 18:34:01 | Re: Commitfest overflow |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2021-08-03 18:30:38 | Re: Commitfest overflow |