On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> I don't like idea of sending gifts. I do like the idea of public thanks. We >> should put full recognition in the release notes for someone who reviews a >> patch. If they didn't review the patch, the person that wrote the patch >> would not have gotten the patch committed anyway. Writing the patch is only >> have the battle. >> >> Heck, think about the FKLocks patch, Alvaro wrote that patch but I know that >> Noah (as well as others) put a herculean effort into helping get it >> committed. >> >> Reviewer recognition should be on the same level as the submitter. > > The problem with that is that that HUGELY depends on the patch and the > review. There are patches where reviewers do a good percentage of the > work and others where they mostly tell that "compiles & runs".
Well, you can't so arbitrarily pick who you're recognizing as contributor and who you aren't. So why not mention them all? They did work for it, some more than others, but they all worked. And since whoever submitted a patch (and got it committed) must have reviewed something as well, they'd be recognized for both reviewing and submitting. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
