On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:56:33AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > As a general comment, I think that your new policy of crediting the > reviewer on every feature except when that reviewer is also a > committer has produced a horrific mess. Just to pick one of many > examples, consider this item: > > Add a security_barrier option for views (KaiGai Kohei, Noah Misch) > > Here is what the commit message says: > > Patch by KaiGai Kohei; original problem report by Heikki Linnakangas > (in October 2009!). Review (in earlier versions) by Noah Misch and > others. Design advice by Tom Lane and myself. Further review and > cleanup by me. > > So there are four people mentioned in this commit message, and you've > picked out two of them to credit, not on the basis of who did the most > work, but rather on the basis of which ones happen to not be > committers. The result is that, as I read through these release > notes, one gets what I believe to be a very misleading notion of who > developed which features. I don't object to not being credited on > this one, but I don't think it makes sense to credit Noah and NOT > credit me. As you have it, people who did little more than say "yep, > looks fine to me" are credited almost equally with the people who > wrote the code, while a committer who heavily revised the patch may > not be mentioned at all, or sometimes (seemingly at random) they are.
I assumed reviewers mentioned in the commit messages made substantive suggestions on improving the patch, rather than just +1. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
