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

Re: Feature freeze progress report

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
Date: 2007-04-30 22:25:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-www
Dave Page wrote:
> In my original message I described my thinking:
> - Developer submits patch, with additional info through a web interface.
> - The web interface formats an email containing the patch description,
> patch and any other info entered, assigns it a patch number, and
> forwards it to the patches list.
> - Discussion ensues on list as per normal. The tracking system monitors
> the list and automatically attaches any posts to the patch that have the
> appropriate reference in the subject line.
> - Community members and committers can review the entire discussion
> through the systems web interface. Updated patches could be submitted
> online.
> - Committers log into the system when necessary to alter the status
> (committed, rejected, awaiting revision, under review etc), or the queue
> name (8.3, 8.4 etc). This could also be done automagically via email
> keywords from specific addresses.
> You would no longer need to manually manage the queue, and the
> committers would simply need to tweak the status flag as required.

Sounds interesting, but I am not sure how that is going to track
multiple versions of the patch, or changes in the email subject.

The bottom line is that there is a lot of thinking that the patch queue
is so large because no one knows what to do.  "Oh, if we were better
communicators, more would be done".  The patch queue is large because we
have lots of March 31 patches, and because we don't have enough people
to review them quickly.

The people who have expressed interest in reviewing patches already know
where we stand on the patches, and a status email of where we are each
patch will be posted shortly.  I just can't do it this time because I am

If you want to try a tracking system, go ahead, just pull from the
patches email list, and somehow try to grab discussion from
hackers/patches on this patches, and give a way to manually update the
patch status via a web site.  If your system works, I will not need to
maintain a separate patches queue, but I will keep doing it until we
know the web site idea will work, just in case.

  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to


pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2007-05-01 07:56:15
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2007-04-30 17:04:25
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-04-30 22:31:57
Subject: Re: Fix for large file support (nonsegment mode support)
Previous:From: Henry B. HotzDate: 2007-04-30 22:23:25
Subject: Fwd: [PATCHES] Preliminary GSSAPI Patches

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group