On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 7:27 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > +1 for not moving such patches to the new CF until the author does > something --- at which point they'd change to "Needs Review" state. > But we should not change them into that state without author input. > And I don't see the value of having them in a new CF until the > author does something.
To be clear: My position was always that it's good that the author has to do *something* to get their patch into the next CF. It's bad that this change in state can easily be missed, though. I've now been on both sides of this, as a patch author and patch reviewer. If the patch was left as "Waiting on Author", as my review of Alexander's patch was, then it ought to not change to "Needs Review" silently. That makes absolutely no sense. -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers