On 2014-09-23 13:23:32 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> Just to be clear here, the *only* issue we should even be discussing
> is whether the patch should or should not have been committed in the
> face of those objections. As Josh has also noted, the commitfest
> process was never meant to constrain what committers do or when they
> do it with their own patches or ones they've worked heavily on. They
> are there as a backstop to make sure that regardless of what the
> committers are doing day to day, patch authors know that their patch
> is expected to receive some review within N weeks.

FWIW, while not really at the core of the problem here, I don't think
this is entirely true anymore.

We certainly seem to to expect bigger feature patches to go through the
commitfest process to some degree. Just look at the discussions about
*committers* patches being committed or not at each cycles last
commitfest. Every single time the point in time they've been submitted
to which CF plays a rather prominent role in the discussion.

Also look at committers like Robert that *do* feel constrained about
when to commit or even expect review for submitted patches.

I think it's obvious that a committer doesn't need to wait till some
later commitfest to commit patches that have since gotten enough review
or are uncontroversial. Neither is the case here.

I also think committers need to be much more careful when committing
patches which they (or their employer) appear to have a business
interest in. Rushing ahead to commit the patch of somebody 'unrelated'
leaves a completely different taste than committing your colleagues
patch. *INDEPENDENT* of the actual reasons and the state of the patch.

Perhaps we can use this as a chance to make the review process a bit
better defined. There certainly have been a few patches by commiters
over the last years that have had a noticeable negative impact. Some of
which might have been cought by more diligent review.


Andres Freund

 Andres Freund                     http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

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

Reply via email to