| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management |
| Date: | 2009-12-07 10:48:24 |
| Message-ID: | 1260182904.16030.0.camel@fsopti579.F-Secure.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On mån, 2009-12-07 at 17:14 +0900, Hitoshi Harada wrote:
> 2009/12/7 Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>:
> >
> > Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> >> It was written and submitted by one person who did not bother to ask
> >> first whether anyone else thought it was worthwhile. So its presence
> >> on the CF list should not be taken as evidence that there's consensus
> >> for it.
> >
> > Should we have "Needs Discussion" phase before "Needs Review" ?
> > Reviews, including me, think patches with needs-review status are
> > worthwhile. In contrast, contributers often register their patches
> > to CF without discussions just because of no response; they cannot
> > find whether no response is silent approval or not.
>
> +1. Sometimes a reviewer waits for the consensus in the community when
> someone else waits for review (, because it is marked as "Needs
> Review").
Yes, I would have had use for this myself a couple of times.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-12-07 10:49:13 | New PostgreSQL Committers |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2009-12-07 10:26:46 | Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier |