Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 18:51, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:05 PM Daniel Gustafsson > wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander > > wrote: > > > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 3:05 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not testing > properly when the change "was so simple"... > > > > Please try again. > > It works now, I was able to move a

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 14:56, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Ugh. i missed one of the two checks. That's what I get for not testing > properly when the change "was so simple"... > > Please try again. It works now, I was able to move a patch (3128) over to the 2021-11 CF. It does bring up the below

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:41 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:06, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: > > Magnus Hagander mailto:mag...@hagander.net>> > writes: > > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:06, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane > wrote: > Magnus Hagander mailto:mag...@hagander.net>> writes: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier > > wrote: > >> That's the

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 3:48 PM Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier > wrote: > >> That's the tricky part. It does not really make sense either to keep > >> moving patches that are waiting on author for months. > > > I'm pretty sure this

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 11:20:21AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 11:32:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > > On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote: > > >> Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries > > >> and proposing that we

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 12:20:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries > > and proposing that we just reject any that look permanently stalled. > > It doesn't do much good to leave things in the

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 11:32:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera writes: > > On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries > >> and proposing that we just reject any that look permanently stalled. > > > I was just going to say

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Magnus Hagander writes: > On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier wrote: >> That's the tricky part. It does not really make sense either to keep >> moving patches that are waiting on author for months. > I'm pretty sure this is the original reason for adding this -- to enforce > that

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 7:31 AM Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:29:08PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > Correct, if one looks at the activity log for an old entry the pattern of > > moving to needs review, then to the next CF, then WoA is clearly visible. > > That's the

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 11:32:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Right. Michael and Jaime have been doing some of that too in the last > few days, but obviously a CFM should only do that unilaterally in very > clear-cut cases of patch abandonment. I was intending to go after some > where maybe a bit

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 2 Oct 2021, at 17:24, Tom Lane wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera writes: >> I think if we all agree that this is a desired workflow, then we should >> update the app to allow WoA patches to be moved to next CF. > > I'm fairly astonished that anyone would have thought that that > *wasn't* an

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Alvaro Herrera writes: > On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote: >> Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries >> and proposing that we just reject any that look permanently stalled. > I was just going to say the same thing yesterday, and reference [1] > when I did it once in

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Alvaro Herrera writes: > I think if we all agree that this is a desired workflow, then we should > update the app to allow WoA patches to be moved to next CF. I'm fairly astonished that anyone would have thought that that *wasn't* an expected case. For example, if someone reviews a patch and

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries > and proposing that we just reject any that look permanently stalled. > It doesn't do much good to leave things in the list when there's > no apparent interest in pushing them to conclusion.

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On 2021-Oct-01, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > On 1 Oct 2021, at 19:49, Jaime Casanova > > wrote: > > I will do that but we should improve that process. > > Correct again. I think if we all agree that this is a desired workflow, then we should update the app to allow WoA patches to be moved to

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Michael Paquier writes: > That's the tricky part. It does not really make sense either to keep > moving patches that are waiting on author for months. The scan of the > CF app I have done was about those idle patches waiting on author for > months. It takes time as authors and/or reviewers

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:29:08PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > Correct, if one looks at the activity log for an old entry the pattern of > moving to needs review, then to the next CF, then WoA is clearly visible. That's the tricky part. It does not really make sense either to keep moving

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

> On 1 Oct 2021, at 19:49, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 01:43:23PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Isn't the usual procedure to change their status, move them, and then >> change it back again? ISTR something like that when I managed a CF. Correct, if one looks at the

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Jaime Casanova writes: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 01:43:23PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> Isn't the usual procedure to change their status, move them, and then >> change it back again? ISTR something like that when I managed a CF. > Really?! That sounds tedious! > I will do that but we should

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 01:43:23PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > On 10/1/21 1:31 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:53:23AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > >> Anyway we need to advance to a close, so I need help with: > >> > >> - what should we do with WoA patches? moving

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On 10/1/21 1:31 PM, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:53:23AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: >> Anyway we need to advance to a close, so I need help with: >> >> - what should we do with WoA patches? moving them to the Next CF? > Correcting myself, we cannot move WoA patches. So we

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 01:34:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Jaime Casanova writes: > > Correcting myself, we cannot move WoA patches. So we should just close > > them with RwF. > > Uh, really? I don't think that's been common practice in the past. > I thought we generally just pushed everything

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Jaime Casanova writes: > Correcting myself, we cannot move WoA patches. So we should just close > them with RwF. Uh, really? I don't think that's been common practice in the past. I thought we generally just pushed everything forward to the next CF with the same status.

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 08:53:23AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > > Anyway we need to advance to a close, so I need help with: > > - what should we do with WoA patches? moving them to the Next CF? Correcting myself, we cannot move WoA patches. So we should just close them with RwF. Barring

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 12:52:10AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:26:33AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September > > > commitfest to > > >

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

Hi Jaime, > Needs review: 171. > Waiting on Author: 79. > Ready for Committer: 15. > > How could we advance on the "needs review" queue? It's just too long! For the record, some patches marked as "Needs review" are in fact rotted and need to be rebased http://cfbot.cputube.org/ I notified

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:26:33AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September commitfest > > to > > In Progress and opened the November one for new entries. Jaime Casanova

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 06:32:38PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 4:26 PM Jaime Casanova > wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > > It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September > > > commitfest to > > > In

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 4:26 PM Jaime Casanova wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September commitfest > > to > > In Progress and opened the November one for new entries. Jaime Casanova has > >

Re: 2021-09 Commitfest

On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September commitfest to > In Progress and opened the November one for new entries. Jaime Casanova has > volunteered for CFM [0], so let’s help him close the 284 still open

2021-09 Commitfest

It is now 2021-09-01 Anywhere On Earth so I’ve set the September commitfest to In Progress and opened the November one for new entries. Jaime Casanova has volunteered for CFM [0], so let’s help him close the 284 still open items in the queue. -- Daniel Gustafsson