Folks, Well, I didn't get much in the way of "poll" responses for the straw poll. However, let me sum up:
-- two hackers thought that reviewers didn't deserve any credit at all. -- of the majority of respondants, things were about evenly split between people who favored "big list at the end" and people who favored "reviewer next to feature". Notably, those who favored "reviewer next to feature" also thought that our standards for what constitutes a "review" should be more stringent. -- reviewers, in general, were unanimous that the only thing which mattered in terms of "rewarding" reviewers was credit in the release notes, and that other "rewards" were nice but inconsequential. -- a couple of compromise proposals were made: a) that reviewers who do actual code modification of the patch get credited on the feature, and those who just review it get credited at the bottom of the release notes, or b) that all "names" move to a web page on www.postgresql.org and come out of the release notes entirely. Speaking as a commitfest manager, I favor compromise proposal (a), personally. Does (a) seem somehow terrible to anyone? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. http://pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
