Re: [HACKERS] Commitfest progress, or lack thereof
On 2014-10-13 21:01:57 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The > patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not realistic > to expect anything to happen to them. > > I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and close > the August one. I hate to do that, because the whole point of a commitfest > is to get patches either rejected or committed, and not leave them hanging. > But if nothing's happening, there's no point waiting. FWIW, I think all of the remaining patches did get a fair amount of feedback. It's not like they were completely ignored. Thanks for managing! Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, 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
Re: [HACKERS] Commitfest progress, or lack thereof
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas < hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > > I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and close the August one. Many thanks for managing commit fest in a best possible way. I think it is big bonanza for all the authors who have patches in the CF as most of the patches got fair enough review in just one CF. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
[HACKERS] Commitfest progress, or lack thereof
The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not realistic to expect anything to happen to them. I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and close the August one. I hate to do that, because the whole point of a commitfest is to get patches either rejected or committed, and not leave them hanging. But if nothing's happening, there's no point waiting. - Heikki -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] CommitFest progress - or lack thereof
Aha, Teodor sent it to the list Dec 28, see http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D1A1677.80300%40sigaev.ru After a month I didn't see any activity on this patch, so I I added it to https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=350 Jan 21 Now, I realised it was too late. Added to current commitfest. Oleg On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Robert Haas wrote: On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten. If you don't see it there, it's because you didn't add it. The deadline for getting your patch into the CommitFest application was January 15th, and several reminders were sent out in advance of that date. Regards, Oleg _ Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru), Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia Internet: o...@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] CommitFest progress - or lack thereof
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: > I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten. If you don't see it there, it's because you didn't add it. The deadline for getting your patch into the CommitFest application was January 15th, and several reminders were sent out in advance of that date. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] CommitFest progress - or lack thereof
Robert, I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten. Oleg On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Robert Haas wrote: With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that are marked either Needs Review or Waiting on Author. The 11 patches that are Waiting on Author are the following: Synchronous Replication, transaction-controlled Recovery Control SQL/MED - postgresql_fdw FDW API Skip validation of Foreign Keys Self-tuning checkpoint sync spread PL/Python explicit subtransactions keeping timestamp of the lasts stats reset Named restore points pg_stat_activity.client_hostname field log_csv_fields ; add current_role log option If you are the author of one of these patches, you need to post an updated patch ASAP, or wait for 9.2. A number of these patches have been sitting for WEEKS without an update. When you post your updated patch (or if by chance you already did), please add a link to the CommitFest application and change the status to Needs Review. Many of these patches likely still need a few more rounds of review before they are committed. If you wait until February 14th at 11:59pm to update them, they're not going to make it in. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/inprogress As for the patches that are marked Needs Review, some people have put their names into the CommitFest application, indicating their intent and commitment to review particular patches, and then have not done so. If you are one of those people, please post your review to the list and update the CommitFest application. If you are a reviewer who has completed all of the reviewing you've previously signed up for, and still want to do more, please consider jumping in on one of the patches that still needs review, and help move the discussion along. Even if you cannot do a full review, please review as much as you can and post your feedback to the list. We need to determine which of these patches are viable candidates for 9.2 and which are not. If you are a patch author and your patch is marked as needing review, please double-check that it still applies and has not bitrotted, and verify that you have responded to all feedback previously given, so that if someone has time to review your patch they can do so productively. Thanks, Regards, Oleg _ Oleg Bartunov, Research Scientist, Head of AstroNet (www.astronet.ru), Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University, Russia Internet: o...@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(495)939-16-83, +007(495)939-23-83 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[HACKERS] CommitFest progress - or lack thereof
With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that are marked either Needs Review or Waiting on Author. The 11 patches that are Waiting on Author are the following: Synchronous Replication, transaction-controlled Recovery Control SQL/MED - postgresql_fdw FDW API Skip validation of Foreign Keys Self-tuning checkpoint sync spread PL/Python explicit subtransactions keeping timestamp of the lasts stats reset Named restore points pg_stat_activity.client_hostname field log_csv_fields ; add current_role log option If you are the author of one of these patches, you need to post an updated patch ASAP, or wait for 9.2. A number of these patches have been sitting for WEEKS without an update. When you post your updated patch (or if by chance you already did), please add a link to the CommitFest application and change the status to Needs Review. Many of these patches likely still need a few more rounds of review before they are committed. If you wait until February 14th at 11:59pm to update them, they're not going to make it in. https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/commitfest_view/inprogress As for the patches that are marked Needs Review, some people have put their names into the CommitFest application, indicating their intent and commitment to review particular patches, and then have not done so. If you are one of those people, please post your review to the list and update the CommitFest application. If you are a reviewer who has completed all of the reviewing you've previously signed up for, and still want to do more, please consider jumping in on one of the patches that still needs review, and help move the discussion along. Even if you cannot do a full review, please review as much as you can and post your feedback to the list. We need to determine which of these patches are viable candidates for 9.2 and which are not. If you are a patch author and your patch is marked as needing review, please double-check that it still applies and has not bitrotted, and verify that you have responded to all feedback previously given, so that if someone has time to review your patch they can do so productively. Thanks, -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers