Re: Commitfest overflow
| От | David G. Johnston |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Commitfest overflow |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAKFQuwawFXUQyMt0JSqx4LSiaTyT6Zp1KsFnELA2VgYqOb63aw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Commitfest overflow (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 7:36 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
Patches that are not being updated regularly have no
business being part of a CommitFest.
As the main issue seems to be "Needs Review" getting punted, the patch author rightly expects feedback before supplying new patches. If they are waiting for months, that isn't on them.
I don't think a patch should be
rejected on the strength of a single -1, but when 2 or 3 people have
shown up to say either that they don't like the idea or that the
implementation is way off base, it's not helpful to leave things in a
state that suggests it needs more eyeballs.
I would agree. One of those 3 people should then state in the thread where they put their -1 that they are, in addition, going to mark the patch as RwF or Rejected in the CF, and then go do just that. If that isn't done, and the CfM comes across this situation, they should probably request the person with the first -1 to make the change instead of doing it for them. And it doesn't have to be explicit -1s to qualify.
David J.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: