| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Commitfest infrastructure |
| Date: | 2009-01-29 11:08:06 |
| Message-ID: | 87pri6qsix.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I thought reviewboard looked pretty good for code quality patch review. It
would be cool if someone could write a mail filter which automatically added
any patches posted to the list to reviewboard.
Incidentally one issue with reviewboard/patchwork/whatever is that they tend
to encourage the review to do a line-by-line review of the code itself rather
than the overall architecture. That's fine for the kind of code-quality
reviews some authors (like myself I admit :( ) need sometimes. And it would
make it easier to do hit-and-run comments when you see minor issues not worth
pestering authors about on-list. But I don't think it really helps with the
hard reviews.
But that's just a cute tool for one particular part of the work. I don't think
it addresses workflow management like RT or debbugs (or trac?) would.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's RemoteDBA services!
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-01-29 12:21:11 | Re: Hot standby, recovery infra |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2009-01-29 10:58:13 | Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable |