On 7/23/13 12:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Apparently it's a little much for experienced reviewers to chew on, too,
since I've been trying to get someone to review it since the beginning
of the Commitfest.

It's more than the available experienced reviewers are willing to chew on fully as volunteers. The reward for spending review time is pretty low right now.

While I understand the call for "resources", this is a bit unfair to
KaiGai, who has put in his time reviewing other people's patches.

If you read Dean Rasheed's comments, it's obvious he put a useful amount of work into his review suggestions. It is not the case here that KaiGai worked on a review and got nothing in return. Unfortunately that has happened to this particular patch before, but the community did a little better this time.

The goal of the CF is usually to reach one of these outcomes for every submission:

-The submission is ready for commit
-The submission needs improvement in X

Review here went far enough to identify an X to be improved. It was a big enough issue that a rewrite is needed, commit at this time isn't possible, and now KaiGai has something we hope is productive he can continue working on. That's all we can really promise here--that if we say something isn't ready for commit yet, that there's some feedback as to why.

I would have preferred to see multiple X issues identified here, given that we know there has to be more than just the one in a submission of this size. The rough fairness promises of the CommitFest seem satisfied to me though.

Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    g...@2ndquadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to