Re: Patch queue concern

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch queue concern
Date: 2007-03-28 19:48:56
Message-ID: 460AC6A8.1050502@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

at seems like a bit of a whacky criterion to use before reviewing a patch.
>
> "wacky"?
>
>> It favours people who are short-sighted and don't see what possible
>> improvements their code has. No code in an ongoing project like this is ever
>> "completed" anyways.
>
> It favors those who do not wait until the last minute, but complete them
> well before the freeze date.

But wouldn't it hurt those that are continuously working the patch with
the community? Just asking.

>
>> It's also an artifact of the working model we have where patches are sent in
>> big chunks and reviewed much later during a feature freeze. If we were
>> committing directly into a CVS repository we would have wanted to commit these
>> changes as soon as they were ready for committing, not wait until they're
>> "completed". Then continue working and commit further changes. It's only
>
> This would have CVS containing uncomplete features --- and before beta,
> we would either have to beg the authors to complete them, or rip them
> out, neither of which we want to do.

I agree here.

>> I think you should be asking people whether they think the code is in a state
>> where it can be committed, not whether they've finished working on it. Just
>> because they see further work that can be done is no reason not to commit
>> useful patches that are functional as they are.
>
> OK, but we don't want something that is ready to be committed, we need
> it complete.

Right, feature complete does not mean bug free that is what the testing
period is for.

>
>> In fact Postgres historically has had an even looser standard. If the code is
>> ready to be committed modulo bugs then it's been included in the feature
>> freeze in the past.
>
> Well, if we know something has bugs, we fix them. Things are committed
> with bugs only because we don't know it has bugs when it was committed.

Yep :)

Joshua D. Drake

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2007-03-28 19:56:18 Re: Patch queue concern
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2007-03-28 19:48:30 Re: Patch queue concern