On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 7:36 AM Robert Haas 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
wait
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:53 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
> Of those, about 50 items have been waiting
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:53 AM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
I think one simple change here would be of s
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 02:57:49PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 08:51:57PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does not
> > matter if there's an explicit number of patches that we allow to be moved to
> > th
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 03:06:54PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 8/5/21 8:39 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
> >>...
> >>
> >>Early commitfests recognized a rule that patch authors owed one review per
> >>patch registered in the commitfest. If authors were holding to that, then
> >>both submissions an
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 2:52 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
> How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does
> not matter if there's an explicit number of patches that we allow to be
> moved to the next CF - someone still needs to make the decision, and I
> agree with Tom it proba
On 8/5/21 8:49 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 8/5/21 11:27 AM, Michael Banck wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 11:55:50AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
it
On 8/5/21 8:39 AM, Andrey Borodin wrote:
...
Early commitfests recognized a rule that patch authors owed one review per
patch registered in the commitfest. If authors were holding to that, then
both submissions and reviews would slow during vacations, but the neglected
fraction of the commitfes
On 8/5/21 11:27 AM, Michael Banck wrote:
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 11:55:50AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 11:55:50AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> > it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> > before. We've been tr
> 5 авг. 2021 г., в 09:25, Noah Misch написал(а):
>
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 12:13:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian writes:
>>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
it seems c
On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 12:13:44PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> >> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
>
>
> I think there might be a higher number of work-in-progress patches
> these days, which represent ongoing collaborative efforts, and are not
> expected to be committed soon, but are registered to attract the
> attention of humans and robots. Perhaps if there were a separate
> status for that, i
On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 8:23 AM Greg Stark wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 11:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > I wonder if our lack of in-person developer meetings is causing some of
> > our issues to not get closed.
>
> That's an interesting thought. Every year there are some especially
> contentiou
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 11:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I wonder if our lack of in-person developer meetings is causing some of
> our issues to not get closed.
That's an interesting thought. Every year there are some especially
contentious patches that don't get dealt with until the in-person
meetin
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 03:42:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra writes:
> > But it's not clear to me whether you're arguing for CFM to assess this,
> > or whether someone else should make this decision?
>
> > IMHO asking the CFM to do this would be a tremendous burden - properly
> > as
Tomas Vondra writes:
> But it's not clear to me whether you're arguing for CFM to assess this,
> or whether someone else should make this decision?
> IMHO asking the CFM to do this would be a tremendous burden - properly
> assessing 50+ patches is a lot of work, and probably requires a fairly
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 09:36:41PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 8/3/21 8:57 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 08:51:57PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> > > How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does
> > > not
> > > matter if there's an explicit num
On 8/3/21 8:57 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 08:51:57PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does not
matter if there's an explicit number of patches that we allow to be moved to
the next CF - someone still needs to mak
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 08:51:57PM +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> How would this be different from the CFM just rejecting patches? It does not
> matter if there's an explicit number of patches that we allow to be moved to
> the next CF - someone still needs to make the decision, and I agree with Tom
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 07:30:38PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I would still ask for someone to spend a little time triaging things,
> so as to direct people who volunteer to be so directed. Many will not
> want to be directed, but I'm sure there must be 5-10 people who would
> do that? (Volunteers
On 8/3/21 8:30 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 17:13, Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down eac
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 11:31 PM Simon Riggs
wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 17:13, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > >> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> > >> it seems clear
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 9:13 PM Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> >> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> >> befor
On Tue, 3 Aug 2021 at 17:13, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> >> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> >> before
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
>> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
>> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
> I wonde
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 04:53:40PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> There are 273 patches in the queue for the Sept Commitfest already, so
> it seems clear the queue is not being cleared down each CF as it was
> before. We've been trying hard, but it's overflowing.
>
> Of those, about 50 items have bee
27 matches
Mail list logo
