| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Commitfest II CLosed |
| Date: | 2013-10-21 13:18:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20131021131824.GA2968@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-10-21 09:15:36 -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 10/21/13 1:31 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > The point of the CF is exactly that all
> > patches get at least one good round of review. Moving unreviewed patches
> > to the next CF will let them just suffer the same fate there.
>
> What is the alternative?
I am not 100% sure, but what's the point of the CF if we're not actually
reviewing patches that wouldn't get review without it? So I guess it's
not starting the next one before we've finished - which we obviously
haven't in this case - the last one.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Albe Laurenz | 2013-10-21 13:31:26 | Re: LDAP: bugfix and deprecated OpenLDAP API |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-10-21 13:15:36 | Re: Commitfest II CLosed |