Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, one thing I think we want to do by having non-committer reviewers, is
to not involve a committer at all if the patch is going to be sent back.
So one thing I was thinking of is:
1) change status to ready for committer
2) post
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) change status to ready for committer
2) post message to -hackers detailing the review and calling for a
committer to check the patch
3) a committer picks it up
Well, the key point there is just
Folks,
This commitfest we have a number of non-committer reviewers doing
reviewing. When they're done with their review, how do they handoff
to a committer for final check and commit?
--Josh
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your
On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 10:59 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
This commitfest we have a number of non-committer reviewers doing
reviewing. When they're done with their review, how do they handoff
to a committer for final check and commit?
One approach would be to assign a committer to each patch,
Neil,
One approach would be to assign a committer to each patch, in addition
to a reviewer (the committer and the reviewer might be the same, of
course). Once the reviewer has signed off on the patch, the committer
can do the final check over and commit.
Well, one thing I think we want to do
On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 11:50 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
So one thing I was thinking of is:
1) change status to ready for committer
2) post message to -hackers detailing the review and calling for a
committer to check the patch
3) a committer picks it up
Sure -- or else have we could have a
Josh Berkus [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, one thing I think we want to do by having non-committer reviewers, is
to not involve a committer at all if the patch is going to be sent back.
So one thing I was thinking of is:
1) change status to ready for committer
2) post message to -hackers
