On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Joshua D. Drake <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > On 10/21/2013 08:11 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> Supposedly, we have a policy that for each patch you submit, you ought >> to review a patch. That right there ought to provide enough reviewers >> for all the patches, but clearly it didn't. And I'm pretty sure that >> some people (like me) looked at a lot MORE patches than they >> themselves submitted. I think auditing who is not contributing in >> that area and finding tactful ways to encourage them to contribute >> would be a very useful service to the project. > > > What if as part of the patch submission process you had to pick the patch > you were going to review? If there are no patches to review, then we > obviously don't have a problem. If there are patches to review then we are > all set. >
if we are going to modify the CF app (not offering myself, and i'm not trying to bind anyone also) i would prefer to see a flag stating if number of reviews registered there are less than submitted patches. This could be a column just after the author of a patch, so people can give preference to patches of submitters that are also reviewing other people's patches. -- Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitaciĆ³n Phone: +593 4 5107566 Cell: +593 987171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers