On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Tom Lane<t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Between now and then, I'm going to be working on identifying which >> patches are not marked as "Waiting on Author" but should be, or which >> are marked as "Waiting on Author" but shouldn't be. > > Er, shouldn't you first work on finishing your own patches? The EXPLAIN > output patch is still "Waiting on Author" ...
Well, I'm hoping those are not mutually exclusive. Figuring out what is waiting on author shouldn't take more than about a half hour each of the next two nights, and the EXPLAIN output patch doesn't need more than another hour or two of work to address the feedback given thus far. However, hypothetically speaking, if I *don't* manage to finish that patch up in the next two nights, I don't see why it should be treated any differently than any other patch that isn't ready to go. Unless you think that patch is so important that it's worth holding up the entire CommitFest for? But I'm assuming that isn't the case. It's important to me not to create the impression that I am giving special treatment to my own patches. I am trying to handle them in the same way that I would handle any other patches (well, except that I nag myself internally, rather than sending myself an email and copying -hackers). Of course, being me, it's hard for me to be absolutely certain that I'm actually doing that, but for the record, that's what I'm attempting to do. One problem that I've run into during this process is that I submitted a LOT of patches - I believe 11 of 71 patches in this CommitFest are mine, and I'm also trying to do high-level management of the entire CommitFest. That's made it really hard for me to do anything like the amount of reviewing I did for the last CommitFest. It doesn't seem quite fair that I'm submitting more patches and reviewing fewer of other people's, but I don't know what to do about it. Not working on the patches that I've submitted slows down the CommitFest just as much as working on them does, only for different reasons. Fortunately, we had enough reviewers anyway: I think that nearly every patch that wasn't already claimed by a committer got a review pretty quickly. Still, I'd welcome any suggestions on how to balance this better. At some point, maybe after this CommitFest is done, it might be good to have a postmortem on what people thought worked well/poorly and suggestions for improvement next time around. > I'm going to go ahead and commit the dict_xsyn patch. There isn't > anything obviously wrong with it, and although I'd have preferred to > get Teodor's input, he's evidently too busy with other work to comment > on it. Works for me. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
