Re: Commitfest overflow

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 7:36 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Patches that are not being updated regularly have no
> business being part of a CommitFest.
>

As the main issue seems to be "Needs Review" getting punted, the patch
author rightly expects feedback before supplying new patches. If they are
waiting for months, that isn't on them.

> I don't think a patch should be
> rejected on the strength of a single -1, but when 2 or 3 people have
> shown up to say either that they don't like the idea or that the
> implementation is way off base, it's not helpful to leave things in a
> state that suggests it needs more eyeballs.
>
>
I would agree. One of those 3 people should then state in the thread where
they put their -1 that they are, in addition, going to mark the patch as
RwF or Rejected in the CF, and then go do just that. If that isn't done,
and the CfM comes across this situation, they should probably request the
person with the first -1 to make the change instead of doing it for them.
And it doesn't have to be explicit -1s to qualify.

David J.