Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres |
Дата | |
Msg-id | bf69c150-9f3f-fd1f-a576-6f8a538cd1fb@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] C++ port of Postgres (Christian Convey <christian.convey@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/11/2016 01:20 AM, Christian Convey wrote: > Hi Heikki, > > Could I ask you a newbie-reviewer question about something I'm seeing > here? https://commitfest.postgresql.org/10/776/ > > From some reading I've done (e.g., Stephen Frost's PGCon 2011 slides), > I got the impression that a successful patch would always have this > sequence of states in commitfest: > 1. patch-record created > ... > 2. Needs Review > ... > 3. Ready for Committer > > But if I'm reading the patch's activity log correctly, it looks like > you marked the patch as "Ready for Committer" (2016-09-06 18:59:02) > without any record of it having been reviewed. > > Was that intentional? Yeah, I commented on the patches at https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/e8e7e5a7-0308-2c36-d32a-7aab16ba498c%40iki.fi. It was very cursory, but I figured that would be sufficient feedback for now, for Peter to proceed with the first few straightforward patches in the series. I don't think there's consensus that we want to do more than that, to actually switch to C++. > P.S. I'm asking because I was planning to review that patch. But I > can't tell if any more review by a non-committer is still required by > the commitfest workflow. I think this has gotten enough attention, for the commitfest workflow. But of course, if you're interested, feel free to review and comment anyway! - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: