* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: > Here's where I think we are with this CommitFest.
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] CommitFest 2011-01 as of 2011-02-04
I'm gonna go out on a limb and hope you meant '2011-02-14' there. :)
> So there are two basic difficulties with wrapping the CommitFest up.
I have to say that I've always been a bit suprised by the idea that the
CommitFest is intended to be done and all patches *committed* at the end
of the month. It's been working really rather well, which is due in
great part to the excellent CF managers (thanks again for being that,
again). That said, we have quite a few non-committer reviewers who
provide good feedback and move the patch back to 'waiting for author'
and that whole process takes a while.
Perhaps a thought for next time would be to offset things a bit. eg:
CF 2011-03 (or whatever):
2011-02-14: Patches should all be submitted
2011-02-14: Reviewers start
2011-03-01: Committers start w/ 'Ready for Committer' patches
2011-03-14: Patches not marked 'Ready for Committer' get bounced
2011-03-31: All patches committed
I'm not against the 'waiting on author' approach, but I do feel like if
we're going to continue to have it, we need to spread it out a bit more.
I do think this would place more work on the CF manager, unfortunately,
but I'd hope that they would primairly be focused on managing the
reviews and not be as busy during the last 2 weeks. Maybe one day I'll
be brave enough to offer to manage one and see. :)
Thanks again, Robert, you've done an excellent job managing the CF.
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
