On 2014-10-13 21:01:57 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The
> patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not realistic
> to expect anything to happen to them.
>
> I'm going to move the remaining patches to the
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <
hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote:
>
> I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and close
the August one.
Many thanks for managing commit fest in a best possible
way. I think it is big bonanza for all the authors who have
The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The
patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not
realistic to expect anything to happen to them.
I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and
close the August one. I hate to do that,
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> 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.
Hearing no objections, I went through and did this, but skippe
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
wrote:
> Robert Haas 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 ti
Robert Haas 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 communit
Of the 83 patches in this CommitFest, there are currently 35 that are
marked as needing review, 23 that are waiting on author, 7 that are
ready for committer, 11 that are committed, 5 that are returned with
feedback, and 2 that are rejected. Since we're now supposedly in the
last week of this mont
On 03/05/2013 02:06 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Where was that discussed, and who objected to the 2nd CF manager?
> It was discussed when Craig volunteered. I suggested two CF managers,
> two people (and Craig) said no, and nobody supported the idea. So I
> dropped it.
If I said no I was wrong to d
> Where was that discussed, and who objected to the 2nd CF manager?
It was discussed when Craig volunteered. I suggested two CF managers,
two people (and Craig) said no, and nobody supported the idea. So I
dropped it.
It's a bit late now, but we've learned that having only one CF manager
for t
On 1 March 2013 18:36, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
>> other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
>> rolling.
>
> Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
Where was that discus
On 03/03/2013 11:58 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> On 03/03/2013 08:37 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
>>> Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
>>> week.
>>
>> Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
>> community account is broken. Grrr.
>
On 03/03/2013 08:37 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
>> week.
>
> Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
> community account is broken. Grrr.
we might be able to fix this if you could tell us what exa
> Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
> week.
Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
community account is broken. Grrr.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-
On 03/02/2013 02:36 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
>> other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
>> rolling.
> Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
>
>> It'd be really good i
> As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
> other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
> rolling.
Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
> It'd be really good if anyone with a patch in the CF could follow up
Hi all
It looks like the commitfest is making very slow progress. At this point
it strikes me that it may be time to look for a line to draw between 9.3
and post-9.3 work, defer all post-9.3 work, and then get the rest into
shape.
As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swam
Aha,
Teodor sent it to the list Dec 28, see
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D1A1677.80300%40sigaev.ru
After a month I didn't see any activity on this patch, so I
I added it to https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=350 Jan 21
Now, I realised it was too late. Added
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten.
If you don't see it there, it's because you didn't add it. The
deadline for getting your patch into the CommitFest application was
January 15th, and several reminders w
Robert,
I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten.
Oleg
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Robert Haas wrote:
With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last
CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that
are marked either Needs Review or Waiting
With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last
CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that
are marked either Needs Review or Waiting on Author. The 11 patches
that are Waiting on Author are the following:
Synchronous Replication, transaction-controlled
Recove
20 matches
Mail list logo
