Re: Last gasp

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Last gasp
Date: 2012-04-11 01:33:35
Message-ID: CAMkU=1zT61WxRijpdNzx6QXxmvn9SXgsoQdfE7A0ZSYJWNTvCA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> It's feasible to think that we might be able to streamline the process
> of booting patches that are not close to committable at the start of a
> CommitFest, and especially at the start of the final CommitFest.

I'd usually consider "booting" a patch to be the domain of committers
(or the commit fest manager), not non-committing reviewers. Could
enough patches get enough attention from committers early enough in
the process to make early booting happen?

> For
> example, limiting patches to a small number of days in the "Waiting on
> Author" state would help a great deal.

Could it be something like a limit on "waiting on author" days, but
only days that are after 2 weeks after the submission deadline count
(and days later than 3 weeks after the submission deadline count
twice). That would encourage people to submit before the deadline,
rather than on the deadline.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-04-11 01:37:06 Re: invalid search_path complaints
Previous Message Andres Freund 2012-04-11 01:32:05 Re: Last gasp