On 06/25/2013 08:26 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > It's not about the reviewers being less. It's a comparison of > effort. The effort for a casual review simply isn't comparable with the > effort spent on developing a nontrivial patch.
Remember: "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. ..." (Brian Kernighan) IMO, the kind of reviews we need are of almost "debug level" difficulty. (To the point where the reviewer becomes a co-author or even takes over and submits a completely revamped patch instead.) I agree that the casual review is several levels below that, so your point holds. I doubt we need more reviews of that kind, though. Thus, I'm in the AAB camp. The remaining question being: What's the criterion for becoming a co-author (and thus getting mentioned in the release notes)? If at all, we should honor quality work with a "prize". Maybe a price for the best reviewer per CF? Maybe even based on votes from the general public on who's been the best, so reviews gain attention that way... "Click here to vote for my review." ... Maybe a crazy idea. Regards Markus Wanner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
