On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:30 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For the record, I typically construct the list of reviewers by reading
> over the thread and adding all the people whose names I find there in
> chronological order, excluding things that are clearly not review
> (like "Bumped to next CF.") and opinions on narrow questions that
> don't indicate that any code-reading or testing was done (like "+1 for
> calling the GUC foo_bar_baz rather than quux_bletch".)  I saw that you
> copied Corey on the original email, but I see no posts from him on the
> thread, which is why he didn't get included in the commit message.

I did credit him in my own proposed commit message. I know that it's
not part of your workflow to preserve that, but I had assumed that
that would at least be taken into account.

Anyway, mistakes like this happen. I'm glad that we now have the
reviewer credit list, so that they can be corrected afterwards.

Peter Geoghegan

Reply via email to