> Clearly I ticked off a bunch of people by publishing "the list". On the > other hand, in the 5 days succeeding the post, more than a dozen > additional people signed up to review patches, and we got some of the > "ready for committer" patches cleared out -- something which nothing > else I did, including dozens of private emails, general pleas to this > mailing list, mails to the RRReviewers list, served to accomplish, in > this or previous CFs.
Others rules appeared, like the 5 days limit. To me it outlines that some are abusing the CF app and pushing there useless patches (not still ready or complete, WIP, ...) > So, as an experiment, call it a mixed result. I would like to have some > other way to motivate reviewers than public shame. I'd like to have > some positive motivations for reviewers, such as public recognition by > our project and respect from hackers, but I'm doubting that those are > actually going to happen, given the feedback I've gotten on this list to > the idea. You're looking at a short term, big effect. And long term ? Will people listed still be interested to participate in a project which stamps people ? With or without review, it's a shame if people stop proposing patches because they are not sure to get time to review other things *in time*. -- Cédric Villemain +33 (0)6 20 30 22 52 http://2ndQuadrant.fr/ PostgreSQL: Support 24x7 - Développement, Expertise et Formation
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
