On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> I hear that CF manager is a difficult role for a single individual. >> So it makes sense to split that role between multiple people. > >> I volunteer to be the CF manager for Replication, and also for >> Performance. ... >> Patches need an eventual committer anyway, so this is a reasonable way >> of having the process be managed by the eventual committer. > > ISTM that we really want the CF manager to be somebody who is *not* > directly involved in reviewing or committing patches. It's a distinct > skill set, so there is no reason why it's a good idea for a committer > to do it. And we need to get the CF work load more spread out, not more > concentrated.
I agree it makes sense if a non-committer performs the role. If a committer does take the role, I would volunteer to split the role and for me to work on the suggested areas. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
