Re: Next commitfest app release is planned for March 18th

On 22.03.25 12:15, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2025 at 18:53, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>> Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> writes:
>>> - If I'm the committer for a patch but not a reviewer, and the patch is
>>> in "needs review" status, then the patch is formally speaking not
>>> actionable by me and should not be under "Patches that are ready for
>>> your review". Perhaps it should be under "Blocked on others" [namely
>>> the reviewers], or in a different category.
>
> I think I agree with this... but is that actually a common situation?
> I'd expect people to mostly "claim a patch as committer" when it's in
> the "ready for committer" state.

It's probably not common, but I seem to recall that at the FOSDEM
developer meeting it was explicitly suggested that committers sign on to
patches earlier so that authors and reviewers have a better idea of whom
to target their patches for. Which is why I started doing that now.

> Yeah I think we need a way to "star" a patch (not just for committers,
> but for anyone). After creating this initial version of this dashboard
> I realized it's also possible to "subscribe to updates" for a patch,
> which means you'll get emails about it. I think if you "subscribe for
> updates" you should also see it in your dashboard (which you currently
> don't). But I also think there should be a way to "star" something, so
> you see it in your dashboard without receiving email updates about it.

It would be good to able to see subscribed-to patches on the dashboard
as well. But let's not create two slightly different mechanisms for this.

>>> - Also, my dashboard shows patches from past and future commitfests. I
>>> don't know what I'm supposed to do with that. The purpose of having a
>>> "current" commitfest is that you work on that one when it's current.
>>
>> This might make sense for the patch author, but I agree it's not
>> appropriate for anyone else.

I don't mind seeing them, just not under "patches that are ready for
your review". If there were other subheadings like "future patches",
"patches forgotten in the past" etc. it would be better.