On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 10 May 2012 13:45, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: >> Right, but I think it would be good to identify them explicitly as reviewers >> if we're going to include the names. > > +1. I think we should probably do more to credit reviewers. It's not > uncommon for a reviewer to end up becoming a co-author, particularly > if they're a committer, but it's a little misleading to add a reviewer > after the feature description without qualifying that they are the > reviewer.
Right. Plus Bruce has arbitrarily excluded committer-reviewers even when they substantially revised the patch as part of that review, and included non-committer-reviewers even when they did little more than say "good idea, +1". There are patches on that list where I did A LOT of work and am not credited, including some where other people did get credited for much less work. I don't feel a crying need to be credited on the maximum possible number of items, but it seems weird to see one group of people credited for what may well have been an hour's work while another group of people isn't credited even when they did two or three days worth of work. When we did the 9.1 release notes, reviewers weren't credited, and I sort of assumed that policy would be the same this time around. I also sort of assumed that the committer would be credited if the commit message stated that they had done substantial further work on the patch, but not if it said that they'd only done a little bit of work or none. Honestly, I don't really care what the standard for inclusion is, but it's so glaringly non-uniform right now that it really makes no sense. I think my own personal preference would be to remove all the reviewer names from individual items and list only the people who contributed significantly to the code, and then have a section at the bottom where we credit all the reviewers without reference to specific patches. Or maybe we should just remove all the names from the release notes, full stop, since it's pretty clear that we're on the verge of having the names take up more space than the items to which they refer. -- 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
