On Wednesday 02 May 2007 01:19, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Actually, that can happen with the current system. The real blocker there > > is that some people, particularly Tom, work so fast that there's no > > chance for a new reviewer to tackle the easy stuff. Maybe the real > > solution is to encourage some of our other contributors to get their feet > > wet with easy patches so that they can help with the big ones later on? > > Yeah, I hear what you say. This is particularly a problem for small bug > fixes: I tend to zing small bugs quickly, first because I enjoy finding/ > fixing them and second because I worry that they'll fall off the radar > screen if not fixed. But I am well aware that fixing those sorts of > issues is a great way to learn your way around the code (I think that's > largely how I learned whatever I know about Postgres). I'd be more > willing to stand aside and let someone else do it if I had confidence > that issues wouldn't get forgotten. So in a roundabout way we come back > to the idea that we need a bug tracker (NOT a patch tracker), plus > people putting in the effort to make sure it stays a valid source > of up-to-date info. Without the latter it won't really be useful. >
Maybe you just need to have a 1 week clock skew when reading pgsql-bugs? -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate