Re: Commitfest process

From: "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Commitfest process
Date: 2008-03-08 07:50:37
Message-ID: 37ed240d0803072350m521c2bcay6743b0269439eef1@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 08/03/2008, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
> wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know that's
> true at least for me. If I want people to review my patch, I'm ready to
> sing and dance if that's what it takes. But if there's extra steps in
> reviewing a patch, I might just not bother.

+1. As a patch author, I have much more personal investment in a
patch than anyone else, and I'm happy to maintain a wiki page if it's
going to get my patches through the process more efficiently.

But I also agree with Josh Drake's comment about a single point of
entry. If patch authors are updating the wiki, and reviewers are
using the wiki to guide their efforts, what purpose does the -patches
mailing list serve? Does sending an email to -patches on top of
submitting the patch on the wiki actually buy us anything? It seems
redundant.

Regards,
BJ

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2008-03-08 08:40:41 Re: Commitfest process
Previous Message Andrew Chernow 2008-03-08 00:23:48 Re: Commitfest process