Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > The CommitFest is supposed to be a time to > *commit the patches that are ready to be committed*, not to wait > indefinitely for them to become ready to be committed.
I beg to differ. Commit Fests are the time when patch authors know they can get feedback from the community and in particular committers. So as a patch author it's best if you can arrange your schedule and be ready to submit new versions as asked, or comment on your design choices and trade-offs, etc. Patch commit can happen whenever in the cycle at the discretion of the committer. Commit Fest are all about *review* and *feedback*. > I therefore propose that we start by marking all of the patches that > are currently Waiting on Author as Returned with Feedback. Most of > them have been that way for a long time. That seems fair. > Then, I think all of the people who are listed as reviewers need to > take a look at the current state of their patches and decide whether > or not they are reasonably ready to be committed. If they are, then I've been distracted away from this commit fest but should be able to get back to it now. Will post soon about the patches I enrolled myself with. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
