2010/1/23 Dimitri Fontaine <dfonta...@hi-media.com>: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I agree with trying to cut down the submission-to-commit delay, but >> >> It seems to me that the CommitFest process is pretty darn effective at >> reducing the submission-to-commit delay, except when you miss the last >> one for the release - then it sucks hard. > > Too bad we can't have a release management team (with committers, > testers, advocacy, doc writers, etc) taking care of the beta to release > road while the first commit fest(s) for next release happen in parallel. > > It would move the primary goal of a commit fest from committing patches > to reviewing them (return with feedback or stamp ready for a committer), > reducing the chances that anyone will have some time to handle the last > step. > It seems to me that recent discussions pass over this point. At least for me, the commit fest is to review patches and give authors feedback in not-so-long time after posting them. I like this idea.
Regards, -- Hitoshi Harada -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
