All,

>From my observation, the CF process ... in fact, all development processes 
>we've had in Postgres ... have suffered from only one problem: lack of 
>consensus on how the process should work.  For example, we've *never* had 
>consensus around the criteria for kicking a patch out of a commitfest.  This 
>lack of consensus has resulted in disorganization, ennui towards the process, 
>deadline overruns, and a lot of general unhappiness.   People have stopped 
>believing in the CF system because we've stopped running it.

I'm encouraged at this point that we've seen where this lack of consensus can 
lead us, maybe at this point we're willing to set aside individual differences 
of opinion on what the criteria should be (especially when it comes to the 
patches we each individually care about) in service of a smoother-running 
process.  Some suggestions:

- for the first 2 weeks of each CF, there should be a *total* moritorium on 
discussing any features not in the current CF on -hackers.
- the CF manager should have unquestioned authority to kick patches.  As in, no 
arguing.
- we should have simple rules for the CF manager for kicking patches, as in:
   * no response from author in 5 days
   * judged as needing substantial work by reviewer
   * feature needs spec discussion

However, the real criteria don't matter as much as coming up with a set of 
criteria we're all willing to obey, whatever they are.

We also need better tools for the CF, but frankly better tools is a minor issue 
and easily solved if we have a consensus which people are willing to obey.  For 
that matter, if we have a smooth and impartial process, we can do other things, 
including: training new reviewers, promoting new committers, changing the 
length of the CF cycle, or changing the PostgreSQL release cycle (yes, really). 
 While our review and commit process is completely subjective and inconsistent, 
though, we can't do any of these things.

--Josh Berkus


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to