On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: >> Alvaro, >> >> > It seems that by mentioning some people but not all, you offended both >> > the people you mentioned (at least some of them, because they are >> > already actively helping) and those that you didn't (at least some of >> > them, because they are already actively helping; those that are not >> > completely inactive in the project, that is). >> >> Yeah, everybody's super-touchy this week. Must be the weather. > > Somehow blaming everyone else doesn't seem like the proper reaction. :-(
I don't think Josh's tone is really the problem we should be worrying about here. He's pointing out a legitimate problem. If you go back and look at the CF app for 9.1, you'll see that Tom, Peter, and I committed the overwhelming majority of the patches which were submitted to CFs and went on to get committed. So if we have a CommitFest where Tom is on vacation and Peter is devoting his time to polishing release N-1 rather than new development on release N, then we're either going to need a much larger investment of time by one or more other committers, or we're not really going to get through everything. When you lose the efforts of somebody who might commit 10 or 20 patches in a CF and comment usefully on another 10 or 20, it leaves a big hole. I don't believe Josh's intent was to disparage your contributions, or Simon's, or Alvaro's, and it certainly isn't mine. I appreciate all the work that has been done on this CommitFest by everyone who has participated, reviewers as well as committers. At the same time, part of the thankless task of being CF manager is asking people to step up to the plate and do more. It takes a heck of a lot of work to get 70 patches reviewed and committed, and it is unlikely that we will ever have enough people spontaneously step up to the plate to make that happen. Since we can't call up people's bosses and complain that they aren't doing enough work on the CommitFest, the CF manager is left with the options of (1) trying to review (and commit?) all 30 or 40 remaining patches single-handedly or (2) begging. If we're then going to complain when they do one or both of those things, well, I think that's a bit unfair. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
