Re: [PATCH] CF app: add "Returned: Needs more interest"

From: Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CF app: add "Returned: Needs more interest"
Date: 2022-08-03 19:06:03
Message-ID: e8d867f7-5214-6c93-d53e-63df59e4ce63@timescale.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 8/3/22 11:41, Andres Freund wrote:
> What patches are we concretely talking about?>
> My impression is that a lot of the patches floating from CF to CF have gotten
> sceptical feedback and at best a minor amount of work to address that has been
> done.

- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2482/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3338/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3181/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2918/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2710/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2266/ (this one was particularly
miscommunicated during the first RwF)
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/2218/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3256/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3310/
- https://commitfest.postgresql.org/38/3050/

Looking though, some of those have received skeptical feedback as you
say, but certainly not all; not even a majority IMO. (Even if they'd all
received skeptical feedback, if the author replies in good faith and is
met with silence for months, we need to not keep stringing them along.)

--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-08-03 19:18:26 Re: Smoothing the subtrans performance catastrophe
Previous Message Tom Lane 2022-08-03 18:53:23 Re: [PATCH] CF app: add "Returned: Needs more interest"