Re: Non-committer reviews: is it helpful?

From: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alexander Borisov <lex(dot)borisov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Non-committer reviews: is it helpful?
Date: 2026-01-29 23:19:27
Message-ID: CAKFQuwbskfHHY2xgLeyzXXu7QqvH=LT5OPEe2YSG79P=yti+Aw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 4:08 PM Alexander Borisov <lex(dot)borisov(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> Sorry, I'm not asking anything of others, I didn't quite understand your
> point (sorry, English is not my native language). With my patches, I
> proposed significant improvements for Postgres.
>
>
When you propose a patch to be committed you are asking, at minimum, a
reviewer to review that patch and a committer to commit it once reviewed.
That is how the process works.

Reviews, though, are always useful.

David J.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-01-29 23:24:47 Re: AIX support
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2026-01-29 23:18:31 Re: split tablecmds.c