From: | "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Need more reviewers! |
Date: | 2008-09-05 13:53:44 |
Message-ID: | 07733be5e7fdf542a8674a5554b7acc5@biglumber.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
> I don't *want* the rule, I just think we *need* the rule because
> otherwise sponsors/managers/etc make business decisions to exclude that
> aspect of the software dev process.
How exactly would you even begin to enforce such a rule? Retroactively
pull otherwise vali patches from the queue? Ban people from sending
email to the -patches list?
> Otherwise we have a patch-and-dump culture that is unsustainable because
> a few people's benevolence as reviewers turns everything into a
> bottleneck. It doesn't need to mean loss of control for core and
> committers.
That problem needs a solution, but not the one you proposed.
- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200809050953
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iEYEAREDAAYFAkjBOdIACgkQvJuQZxSWSsiFoACgoqOgumuuZq6z2HBPSAPZUWHd
kS0An2TgFmOLTgdFWuLkpazFbECY4nnz
=ZrYl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-09-05 13:54:41 | Re: libpq events update |
Previous Message | Andrew Chernow | 2008-09-05 13:49:21 | libpq events update |