Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: management of large patches

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: management of large patches
Date: 2011-01-02 12:41:58
Message-ID: AANLkTinEJQmPnm4s+JdnGNMTvUuFqt5xFr3ESNwkwtTN@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:29 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> As for priority between those that *were* submitted earlier, and have
> been reworked (which is how the system is supposed to work), it's a
> lot harder. And TBH, I think we're going to have a problem getting all
> those done. But the question is - are all ready enough, or are a
> couple going to need the "returned with feedback" status *regardless*
> of if this is the last CF or not?

Well, that all depends on how much work people are willing to put into
reviewing and committing them, which I think is what we need to
determine.  None of those patches are going to be as simple as "patch
-p1 < $F && git commit -a && git push".  Having done a couple of these
now, I'd say that doing final review and commit of a patch of this
scope takes me ~20 hours of work, but it obviously varies a lot based
on how good the patch is to begin with and how much review has already
been done.  So I guess the question is - who is willing to step up to
the plate, either as reviewer or as final reviewer/committer?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2011-01-02 12:47:17
Subject: Base Backup Streaming (was: Sync Rep Design)
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-01-02 12:27:38
Subject: Re: Libpq PGRES_COPY_BOTH - version compatibility

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group