On 25 June 2013 18:17, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Hackers, > > I'd like to take a straw poll here on how we should acknowledge > reviewers. Please answer the below with your thoughts, either on-list > or via private email. > > How should reviewers get credited in the release notes? > > a) not at all > b) in a single block titled "Reviewers for this version" at the bottom. > c) on the patch they reviewed, for each patch >
b) Unless they contribute enough to the patch to be considered a co-author. > Should there be a criteria for a "creditable" review? > > a) no, all reviews are worthwhile > b) yes, they have to do more than "it compiles" > c) yes, only code reviews should count > a) Sometimes even "it compiles" can be worthwhile, if there is doubt over platform compatibility. All contributions should be acknowledged and encouraged. > Should reviewers for 9.4 get a "prize", such as a t-shirt, as a > promotion to increase the number of non-submitter reviewers? > > a) yes > b) no > c) yes, but submitters and committers should get it too > b) Getting your name in the fine manual is reward enough ;-) Regards, Dean -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
