On 12/18/2014 10:37 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
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.
Truthfully, I think this is something that should be solved through
crowdsourcing. Why is a relatively small group of people (-hackers)
trying to solve a problem that each individual can solve on their own
given the tools?
Allow people to submit for approval their own contributor listing, allow
people to edit for approval their own contributor listing. Just like
news/events.
If people want to be listed they can be, it just has to be approved.
Then have a very basic (not unlike what JB just posted) rules for the
moderators to review against.
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, @cmdpromptinc
"If we send our children to Caesar for their education, we should
not be surprised when they come back as Romans."
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
