Re: Multi-xacts and our process problem

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Multi-xacts and our process problem
Date: 2015-05-11 23:25:25
Message-ID: 20150511232525.GU12950@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-05-11 19:04:32 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I think there's nobody, or at least very few people, who are getting
> paid to find/fix bugs rather than write cool new features. This is
> problematic. It doesn't help when key committers are overwhelmed by
> trying to process other peoples' patches. (And no, I'm not sure that
> "appoint more committers" would improve matters. What we've got is
> too many barely-good-enough patches. Tweaking the process to let those
> into the tree faster will not result in better quality.)

+many

Except perhaps that I'd expand "find/fix bugs" to include "review and
integrate patches". Because I think few people are paid to do that
either. I now partially am (which obviously isn't sufficient). There's
no way it's possible to e.g. work on integrating something like upsert
in a reasonable timeframe otherwise.

The lack of paid time to integrate stuff properly also leads to part of
the quality problem, besides delaying stuff.

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2015-05-12 00:01:01 Re: Fixing busted citext function declarations
Previous Message David E. Wheeler 2015-05-11 23:18:46 Re: Fixing busted citext function declarations