| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: logical column ordering |
| Date: | 2015-03-23 18:52:04 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTOpOAwtXBxvS_i8s2THXPo9G1pDUf0HjiUj5XTnaJ=8A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Not sure how that's supposed to improve the situation? Also, when you
> change the status to 'stalled', it only makes it more difficult to
> identify why it was stalled (was it waiting for author or a review?).
>
> What might be done is tracking "time since last patch/review", but I
> really don't know how we're going to identify that considering the
> problems with identifying which messages are patches.
Perhaps I explained myself poorly. I am proposing having a totally
automated/mechanical way of highlighting no actual change in status in
the CF app. So I think we are in agreement here, or close enough. I
was just talking about a somewhat arbitrary point at which patches are
considered to have stalled within the CF app.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2015-03-23 18:52:43 | Re: logical column ordering |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2015-03-23 18:50:13 | Re: logical column ordering |