Re: CommitFest status/management

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CommitFest status/management
Date: 2009-12-01 04:03:00
Message-ID: 4B149574.9020904@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Smith wrote:
>
> If the need here is to speed up how fast things are fed to committers,
> we can certainly do that. The current process still favors having
> reviewers do as much as possible first, as shown by all the stuff
> sitting in the re-review queue. The work we're waiting on them for
> could be done by the committers instead if we want to shorten the
> whole process a bit. I don't think that's really what you want though.
>

As I have observed before, I think we need some infrastructure to help
committers claim items, so we don't duplicate work.

Right now the only items marked "ready for reviewer" are Streaming
Replication and Hot Standby, which I imagine Heiki will be handling.

I'm going to look at the YAML format for EXPLAIN patch shortly.

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-12-01 04:03:08 Re: SE-PgSQL patch review
Previous Message Greg Smith 2009-12-01 03:16:23 Re: CommitFest status/management