Re: 2016-01 Commitfest

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 2016-01 Commitfest
Date: 2016-01-25 16:36:04
Message-ID: 20160125163604.GA510318@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Into its third week, this commitfest is looking like this:

Needs review: 41.
Waiting on Author: 24.
Ready for Committer: 10.
Committed: 23.
Rejected: 1.
Total: 99.

The number of committed patches continues to grow slowly but steadily,
which is a good sign -- and in the past week it grew even faster than
the week before, which is a nice indicator. Also, the number of patches
waiting on author keeps growing, which is a good indicator for "us"
(reviewers) because it means authors have actionable information; it
does mean patch authors have been slacking, though, so please do pick up
your stuff and get it up to snuff. Hopefully we will be receiving
updates patches soon.

We still have 41 patches that haven't gotten enough review though. The
bad part about it is that there's a number of patches that have been
bouncing for many commitfests now. Here's a list of the patches with
the most such actions (both in Needs Review and Ready for Committer

Five "Moved to next commitfest"
Default Roles

Four "Moved to next commitfest"
Unique Joins

Three "Moved to next commitfest"
postgres_fdw: Options to set fetch_size at the server and table level.

Atomic commit support for foreign data wrappers

extends pgbench expressions with functions

improving join estimates using FK

checkpoint continuous flushing

I list these now because it is fair to get them processed before others
that are more recent. (If we do not want them at all, let's reject
them.) This list does not include patches that were closed as Returned
with Feedback and resubmitted later as a new patch entry; I don't think
the current CF process lets me know that.

Please keep in mind that any patch that's been Waiting on Author for too
long(*) may be closed as Returned with Feedback rather than moved to the
next commitfest, so make sure you send updated patches. Patches marked
Needs Review but that have actually had reviews on list may suffer the
same fate, depending on how extensive the rework needed is.

Due to FOSDEM, I'm unlikely to be doing the closing action exactly on
January 31st, but it will be near that date.

(*) "Too long" is arbitrarily defined by your beloved commitfest

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-01-25 17:13:54 Re: postgres_fdw join pushdown (was Re: Custom/Foreign-Join-APIs)
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2016-01-25 16:29:31 Re: [patch] Proposal for \crosstabview in psql