Hello Andres,
I don't see much point in asking people to postpone. I do think however
it can make sense to respond with something like: Fabien, you've been
submitting a lot of patches over the last year. Thanks for the that! To
keep up with the amount of incoming work the prject relies on
contributors also shouldering some review responsibility. Please
consider focusing on that, while we're working on getting 9.6 ready.
Sure, I definitely agree about that.
I try to review all patches in my (small) area of (limited) expertise,
which is currently pgbench & some part of the checkpointer. I did also
minor bug fixes (eg isbn). AFAICS none of the patches lacking a reviewer
in 9.6 CF fall in these area.
Also note that while I submitted patches for the checkpointer, I ended up
reviewing your version of the patches, so somehow I was first author, then
a driving force to provoke you to do it your way, and finally a reviewer,
esp in performance testing which is a time consumming task.
I can also learn other things, but that means more time to do a useful
review. This "more" time is available for me mostly over the Summer, so
I'll try to be more useful to the community, and also learn new stuff,
then. Probably not ideal for 9.6, but it cannot be helped.
--
Fabien.
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
