| From: | Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: commit fest status and release timeline |
| Date: | 2014-03-03 15:34:13 |
| Message-ID: | 5314A0F5.5030405@fuzzy.cz |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 1.3.2014 18:01, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Status Summary. Needs Review: 36, Waiting on Author: 7, Ready for
> Committer: 16, Committed: 43, Returned with Feedback: 8, Rejected:
> 4. Total: 114.
>
> We're still on track to achieve about 50% committed patches, which
> would be similar to the previous few commit fests. So decent job so
> far.
I'm wondering what is the best way to select a patch to review. I mean,
there are many patches with "needs review" (and often no reviewer) just
one or two comments, but when I checked the email archives there's often
a lot people discussing it.
Do we have a list of patches that didn't get a proper review yet / badly
need another one?
What about improving the commitfest page by displaying a number of
related e-mail messages / number of people involved? Shouldn't be
difficult to get this from the mail archives ...
regards
Tomas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-03-03 15:35:03 | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-03-03 15:31:03 | Re: Custom Scan APIs (Re: Custom Plan node) |