On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 2:02 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2018-05-22 19:59:29 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> So the big question is, is the data we can get out of it worth it?
>
> I can't see it being worth it personally.
I tend to agree. First, it sounds like a lot of work. If we had the
op
Hi,
On 05/22/2018 01:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
I wonder if we should consider adding a field to the CF app *specifically*
to track things like this. What I'm thinking is a field that's set (or at
least verified) by the person who flags a
Hi,
On 2018-05-22 19:59:29 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> So the big question is, is the data we can get out of it worth it?
I can't see it being worth it personally.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Magnus Hagander
> wrote:
> > I wonder if we should consider adding a field to the CF app
> *specifically*
> > to track things like this. What I'm thinking is a field that's set (or at
> > least verified) by th
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 4:19 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I wonder if we should consider adding a field to the CF app *specifically*
> to track things like this. What I'm thinking is a field that's set (or at
> least verified) by the person who flags a patch as committed with choices
> like Trivia
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Sergei Kornilov wrote:
> Hello
> I can not find "Reports" in bottom any page of CF app...
>
> Such stats covers only reviews marked in CF app? Through
> "Comment"->"Review" buttons? I'm afraid this statistics will be inaccurate
> for new users (like me). Wiki pag
Hello
I can not find "Reports" in bottom any page of CF app...
Such stats covers only reviews marked in CF app? Through "Comment"->"Review"
buttons? I'm afraid this statistics will be inaccurate for new users (like me).
Wiki page https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch say
> Send revi
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 29 March 2018 at 09:19, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, Fabien!
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Fabien COELHO
> wrote:
>
> And the last
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:37 AM, Alexander Korotkov <
a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Magnus Hagander
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov <
>> a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Fabien!
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 09:38:28AM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I suggest someone does another analysis that shows how many patch
> reviews have been conducted by patch authors, so we can highlight
> people who are causing the problem yet not helping solve the problem.
This data is already partiall
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov <
> a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Fabien!
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Fabien COELHO
>> wrote:
>>
>>> And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here i
On 29 March 2018 at 09:19, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Fabien!
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here is the
final score for this
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Alexander Korotkov <
a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> Hi, Fabien!
>
> On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
>> And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here is the
>>> final score for this time:
>>> Committed: 55.
>>> Moved to nex
Hi, Fabien!
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here is the
>> final score for this time:
>> Committed: 55.
>> Moved to next CF: 103.
>> Rejected: 1.
>> Returned with Feedback: 47.
>> Total: 206.
>>
>> Thanks to all the con
Hello Michaël,
And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here is the
final score for this time:
Committed: 55.
Moved to next CF: 103.
Rejected: 1.
Returned with Feedback: 47.
Total: 206.
Thanks to all the contributors for this session! The CF is now closed.
Thanks for the CF mana
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> Remains 22 patches as of now, exactly *one* for each committer.
And the last 21 patches have been classified as well. Here is the
final score for this time:
Committed: 55.
Moved to next CF: 103.
Rejected: 1.
Returned with Feedback: 47.
Tot
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
> On 11/30/2017 05:51 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:> One thing that could be
> improved in my
>>
>> opinion is that patch authors should try more to move a patch to a
>> following commit fest once the end gets close...This would leverage
>> sli
On 11/30/2017 05:51 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:> One thing that could be
improved in my
opinion is that patch authors should try more to move a patch to a
following commit fest once the end gets close...This would leverage
slightly the load of work for the CFM.
Thanks for the suggestion. I had n
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> I want to move also "Covering B-tree indexes (aka INCLUDE)" . Seems like we
> have common view with Peter Geoghegan and Anastasia that found drawback will
> be fixed before next CF.
>
> If there is no objections, I'll put "needs review" to
Michael, thank you for your hard work!
> 30 нояб. 2017 г., в 10:39, Michael Paquier
> написал(а):
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
> wrote:
>> Now I tried that, successfully marking it as "waiting on author", but the
>> patch doesn't move to the next CF when I then cha
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com]
> If you have a patch "waiting on author" that you would like to move to the
> next commit fest, just switch its status back temporarily to "needs review",
> and then do the move. Yes, that's unnecessary complication but I am not
> going to f
On 2017/11/30 14:29, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com]
>> All patches not marked as ready for committer have been classified, by either
>> being marked as returned with feedback or moved to the next CF.
>> I may have made some mistakes of course,
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki
wrote:
> Now I tried that, successfully marking it as "waiting on author", but the
> patch doesn't move to the next CF when I then change the status as "Move to
> next CF." How can I move the patch to next CF?
If you have a patch "waiting on
From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com]
> All patches not marked as ready for committer have been classified, by either
> being marked as returned with feedback or moved to the next CF.
> I may have made some mistakes of course, hence if you feel that the status
> of your patch is
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> The current commit fest is coming to an end, and as many may have
> noticed, I have begun classifying patches depending on their status.
> This will likely take a couple of days. As a last push, I would like
> to point out that there are 2
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:30 PM, Michael Paquier
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>> Anybody willing to take the hat of the commit fest manager? If nobody,
>> I am fine to take the hat as default choice this time.
>
> And now it is open. Let's the fest begin.
The
26 matches
Mail list logo
