| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fun with "Ready for Committer" patches |
| Date: | 2016-03-09 12:47:35 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZQYqucmZM9x8Vsih65L_RscJx4K88orUs5ak2jn8CSRA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 9 March 2016 at 07:18, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>> Many of "needs review" state patches already have reviewer(s). Do you
>> mean we want more reviewers in addition to them for such patches?
>
> Yeah. Personally I'm not too confident about what precisely is required to
> move a patch from needs-review to ready-for-committer. I've done a chunk of
> review for a number of patches, but I'm not always confident saying "all
> clear, proceed".
I think that if you've done your best to review it, and you don't see
any remaining problems, you should mark it Ready for Committer.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-09 13:11:35 | Re: Parallel Aggregate |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-03-09 12:47:05 | Re: fun with "Ready for Committer" patches |