Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2016-01-20 09:48:24 -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote: >> There will always be patches desirable-enough that they will be reviewed >> whether or not the submitter reviewed other patches.
> I think that's actually getting less and less true. By now the really > desirable-enough features imply so much work by reviewer and committers, > over a prolonged time, that they're imo unlikely to be picked up just > because they're desirable, even when the author doesn't play by the > rules. I don't think an exceptional case or two is particularly > important. Thinking about that crystallized something for me that maybe is worth considering. There is a difference between big patches (say, the size of the GROUPING SETS one) and little patches (say, most of the tab-completion fixes we get). We're currently trying to apply the same process and criteria to both cases, and I'm thinking that that is a bad idea. I am not sure what exactly ought to be different about them, but probably something should. I think for small patches, we are using the CF app mostly to be sure things don't fall through the cracks, but maybe we don't need the whole process otherwise. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers