On 7/23/13 12:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Apparently it's a little much for experienced reviewers to chew on, too,
since I've been trying to get someone to review it since the beginning
of the Commitfest.
It's more than the available experienced reviewers are willing to chew
on fully as volunteers. The reward for spending review time is pretty
low right now.
While I understand the call for "resources", this is a bit unfair to
KaiGai, who has put in his time reviewing other people's patches.
If you read Dean Rasheed's comments, it's obvious he put a useful amount
of work into his review suggestions. It is not the case here that
KaiGai worked on a review and got nothing in return. Unfortunately that
has happened to this particular patch before, but the community did a
little better this time.
The goal of the CF is usually to reach one of these outcomes for every
submission:
-The submission is ready for commit
-The submission needs improvement in X
Review here went far enough to identify an X to be improved. It was a
big enough issue that a rewrite is needed, commit at this time isn't
possible, and now KaiGai has something we hope is productive he can
continue working on. That's all we can really promise here--that if we
say something isn't ready for commit yet, that there's some feedback as
to why.
I would have preferred to see multiple X issues identified here, given
that we know there has to be more than just the one in a submission of
this size. The rough fairness promises of the CommitFest seem satisfied
to me though.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
