Josh Berkus wrote:
> So, then, I have a proposal for criteria for getting on the contributors
> list via patch review:
>
> - substantial, deep review of at least one patch (including detailed
> code review and possible corrections)
>
> - "functionality" reviews of at least 3 patches, including full
> write-ups (not just "it compiled, seems to work").
>
> Kibitz as you may, but please don't try to make these criteria more
> *complicated*, because there's no way we'll ever keep track.
The problem with complicated rules (which these, I think, already are)
is how to keep track of people that helps to which level. I make a
point of crediting reviewers and code contributors in my commit
messages, but can you tell which ones of the following guys should make
it to these lists? I yanked this text from my commit
73c986adde5d73a5e2555da9b5c8facedb146dcd:
Reviewed to varying degrees by Michael Paquier, Andres Freund, Robert
Haas, Amit Kapila, Fujii Masao, Jaime Casanova, Simon Riggs, Steven
Singer, Peter Eisentraut
I do agree that we need to give credit in some form, though. I'm just
saying can we please not put the responsibility on committers.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
