On 09/11/2016 01:20 AM, Christian Convey wrote:
Could I ask you a newbie-reviewer question about something I'm seeing
From some reading I've done (e.g., Stephen Frost's PGCon 2011 slides),
I got the impression that a successful patch would always have this
sequence of states in commitfest:
1. patch-record created
2. Needs Review
3. Ready for Committer
But if I'm reading the patch's activity log correctly, it looks like
you marked the patch as "Ready for Committer" (2016-09-06 18:59:02)
without any record of it having been reviewed.
Was that intentional?
Yeah, I commented on the patches at
It was very cursory, but I figured that would be sufficient feedback for
now, for Peter to proceed with the first few straightforward patches in
the series. I don't think there's consensus that we want to do more than
that, to actually switch to C++.
P.S. I'm asking because I was planning to review that patch. But I
can't tell if any more review by a non-committer is still required by
the commitfest workflow.
I think this has gotten enough attention, for the commitfest workflow.
But of course, if you're interested, feel free to review and comment anyway!
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: