| From: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management |
| Date: | 2009-12-07 08:14:53 |
| Message-ID: | e08cc0400912070014l7a3053a2rfecb10ff17a3c814@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/12/7 Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>:
>
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> It was written and submitted by one person who did not bother to ask
>> first whether anyone else thought it was worthwhile. So its presence
>> on the CF list should not be taken as evidence that there's consensus
>> for it.
>
> Should we have "Needs Discussion" phase before "Needs Review" ?
> Reviews, including me, think patches with needs-review status are
> worthwhile. In contrast, contributers often register their patches
> to CF without discussions just because of no response; they cannot
> find whether no response is silent approval or not.
+1. Sometimes a reviewer waits for the consensus in the community when
someone else waits for review (, because it is marked as "Needs
Review").
Regards,
--
Hitoshi Harada
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2009-12-07 08:28:06 | Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-12-07 08:13:20 | Re: Reading recovery.conf earlier |