Re: new CommitFest states

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>   
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>     
>>> I don't think there should be a transition from Returned with Feedback
>>> back to Waiting for review.  Granted we might allow that occasionally
>>> as an exceptional case, but normally Returned with Feedback is a final
>>> state.
>>>       
>> The main reason I put that in there is that
>> sometimes a reviewer or even the CF manager (I did this myself once this
>> time) will mark something "Returned with feedback", thinking there's no way
>> the issues pointed out can be addressed right now.  And then, a day or two
>> later, in comes a patch that does just that; surprise!
> Hmm, I'm not aware of any actual cases of this.  I'm usually pretty
> conservative about jumping to RWF unless there's been lag or we're
> near the end of the CommitFest, so it doesn't come up.
>   

I've concluded that the times this happened was just me being too 
aggressive here to close some patches out after getting behind, and I 
removed the path you objected to out of the page as not to encourage 
that behavior.

I think that http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Running_a_CommitFest makes 
for a pretty reasonable and quite detailed set of guidelines now for the 
whole process, which means we've successfully gotten "what Robert did to 
make things work well" documented fully.  All it's missing is for the 
"Discussing review" state to be an official one.  I could undo things 
back to where it's not listed, but I do think it matches what we really 
do better and might as well be recognized as such.

-- 
Greg Smith    2ndQuadrant   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com  www.2ndQuadrant.com