| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fun with "Ready for Committer" patches |
| Date: | 2016-03-09 21:19:29 |
| Message-ID: | 20160309211929.dpr355rkvhybzroc@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-03-10 06:14:25 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> IMO, during a review one needs to think of himself as a committer.
> Once the reviewer switches the patch to "Ready for committer", it
> means that the last version of the patch present would have been the
> version that gained the right to be pushed.
And one consideration there is whether you, as the committer, would be
ok with maintaining this feature going forward.
But I think for less experienced reviewers that's hard to judge; and I
think asking everyone to do that raises the barriers to do reviews
considerably. So I think we should somehow document that it's ok to
mark the patch as such, but that you're not forced to do that if you
don't want to.
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-03-09 21:23:07 | Re: fun with "Ready for Committer" patches |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-03-09 21:14:25 | Re: fun with "Ready for Committer" patches |