Robert, Tom, > Hm ... there are people out there who think *I* get high off rejecting > patches. I have a t-shirt to prove it. But I seem to be pretty > ineffective at it too, judging from these numbers.
It's a question of how we reject patches, especially first-time patches. We can reject them in a way which makes the submitter more likely to fix them and/or work on something else, or we can reject them in a way which discourages people from submitting to PostgreSQL at all. For example, the emails to Radoslaw mentioned nothing about pg_ident, documented spacing requirements, accidental inclusion of files he didn't mean to touch, etc. Instead, a couple of people told him he should abandon his chosen development IDE in favor of emacs or vim. Radoslaw happens to be thick-skinned and persistent, but other first-time submitters would have given up at that point and run off to a more welcoming project. Mind, even better would be to get our "so you're submitting a patch" documentation and tools into shape; that way, all we need to do is send the first-time submitter a link. Will work on that between testing ... -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com San Francisco -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
