On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and close
the August one.
Many thanks for managing commit fest in a best possible
way. I think it is big bonanza for all the authors who have
On 2014-10-13 21:01:57 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The
patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not realistic
to expect anything to happen to them.
I'm going to move the remaining patches to the
The August commitfest is still Open, with a few more patches left. The
patches that remain have stayed in limbo for a long time. It's not
realistic to expect anything to happen to them.
I'm going to move the remaining patches to the next commitfest, and
close the August one. I hate to do
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
The CommitFest is supposed to be a time to
*commit the patches that are ready to be committed*, not to wait
indefinitely for them to become ready to be committed.
I beg to differ. Commit Fests are the time when patch authors know they
can get
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Dimitri Fontaine
dimi...@2ndquadrant.fr wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
The CommitFest is supposed to be a time to
*commit the patches that are ready to be committed*, not to wait
indefinitely for them to become ready to be committed.
I beg
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
I therefore propose that we start by marking all of the patches that
are currently Waiting on Author as Returned with Feedback. Most of
them have been that way for a long time.
Hearing no objections, I went through and
Of the 83 patches in this CommitFest, there are currently 35 that are
marked as needing review, 23 that are waiting on author, 7 that are
ready for committer, 11 that are committed, 5 that are returned with
feedback, and 2 that are rejected. Since we're now supposedly in the
last week of this
Where was that discussed, and who objected to the 2nd CF manager?
It was discussed when Craig volunteered. I suggested two CF managers,
two people (and Craig) said no, and nobody supported the idea. So I
dropped it.
It's a bit late now, but we've learned that having only one CF manager
for
On 03/05/2013 02:06 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Where was that discussed, and who objected to the 2nd CF manager?
It was discussed when Craig volunteered. I suggested two CF managers,
two people (and Craig) said no, and nobody supported the idea. So I
dropped it.
If I said no I was wrong to do
Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
week.
Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
community account is broken. Grrr.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On 03/03/2013 08:37 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
week.
Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
community account is broken. Grrr.
we might be able to fix this if you could tell us what exactly
On 03/03/2013 11:58 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
On 03/03/2013 08:37 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Works for me, since I haven't been able to find time for it during the
week.
Set aside a couple hours to deal with it this AM, foiled because my
community account is broken. Grrr.
we might be
On 1 March 2013 18:36, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
rolling.
Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
Where was
As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
rolling.
Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
It'd be really good if anyone with a patch in the CF could follow up
On 03/02/2013 02:36 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately swamped in
other work I bear some of the responsibility for not keeping things
rolling.
Just FYI, this is exactly why I wanted a 2nd CF manager for this CF.
It'd be really good if anyone
Hi all
It looks like the commitfest is making very slow progress. At this point
it strikes me that it may be time to look for a line to draw between 9.3
and post-9.3 work, defer all post-9.3 work, and then get the rest into
shape.
As I stepped up to work on the CF and then became immediately
With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last
CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that
are marked either Needs Review or Waiting on Author. The 11 patches
that are Waiting on Author are the following:
Synchronous Replication, transaction-controlled
Robert,
I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten.
Oleg
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Robert Haas wrote:
With ten days left in the current CommitFest, being the last
CommitFest for 9.1 development, there are presently 40 patches that
are marked either Needs Review or
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Oleg Bartunov o...@sai.msu.su wrote:
I don't see btree_gist with knn-support. I'm afraid it'll be forgotten.
If you don't see it there, it's because you didn't add it. The
deadline for getting your patch into the CommitFest application was
January 15th, and
Aha,
Teodor sent it to the list Dec 28, see
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/4D1A1677.80300%40sigaev.ru
After a month I didn't see any activity on this patch, so I
I added it to https://commitfest.postgresql.org/action/patch_view?id=350 Jan 21
Now, I realised it was too late.
20 matches
Mail list logo
