On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> On 9 March 2016 at 07:18, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> wrote: >>> Many of "needs review" state patches already have reviewer(s). Do you >>> mean we want more reviewers in addition to them for such patches? >> >> Yeah. Personally I'm not too confident about what precisely is required to >> move a patch from needs-review to ready-for-committer. I've done a chunk of >> review for a number of patches, but I'm not always confident saying "all >> clear, proceed". > > I think that if you've done your best to review it, and you don't see > any remaining problems, you should mark it Ready for Committer.
IMO, during a review one needs to think of himself as a committer. Once the reviewer switches the patch to "Ready for committer", it means that the last version of the patch present would have been the version that gained the right to be pushed. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers