My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the
patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that
reviewing/committing other people's patches is not fun, it's
just work :-(. So it's no surprise that it tends to
On Thu, 2007-03-29 at 01:34 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that reviewing/committing other
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that reviewing/committing other
people's patches is
Gregory Stark wrote:
Obviously a big part of that is that we just don't have enough committers. I'm
hopeful that in time that situation will improve but in the meantime we do
have a problem and the burden falls unfairly on a few.
Is there anything others can do to help? If non-committers like
Andrew Dunstan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There is plenty of scope for people to review patches if they aren't
committers. In fact, it is highly encouraged. Please review anything on
the patch list you feel able to.
Sure. Even if you miss things, every problem you do spot is one less...
and
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It favours people who are short-sighted and don't see what possible
improvements their code has. No code in an ongoing project like this is
ever
completed anyways.
It favors those who do not wait until the last minute,
We don't want open-ended a few days before feature feeze. We want them
to be as done, at some complete stopping point, and submitted.
OK, but we don't want something that is ready to be committed, we need
it complete.
So how many more releases before you think Postgres is complete?
I am
Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that reviewing/committing other
people's patches is not fun, it's just
Gregory Stark wrote:
Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that reviewing/committing
Bruce Momjian wrote:
OK, but we don't want something that is ready to be committed, we need
it complete.
So how many more releases before you think Postgres is complete?
I am getting tired of your semantic games, here, Greg. I have no idea
what you are trying to accomplish, but I have
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The basic problem is we have a lot of complex patches coming in, and
many from people who do not have years of experience with submitting
patches to PostgreSQL. A complex patch from a novice user takes a lot
of time to review, and frankly, we don't have
Hello,
I found in queue patch simply custom variables protection, Pavel Stehule
which you removed and didn't find my patch for scrollable cursors in
plpgsql.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
_
Emotikony a pozadi programu MSN Messenger
Josh Berkus wrote:
Bruce,
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a significant number of patches that have are not ready for
review because they have not been completed by their authors.
Can you flag those somehow?
I have sent out email on every
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Right now, all the patches I think are ready for review are in the patch
queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a significant number of patches that
On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 21:15 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Right now, all the patches I think are ready for review are in the patch
queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a significant number
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Right now, all the patches I think are ready for review are in the patch
queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2007-03-27 at 21:15 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Right now, all the patches I think are ready for review are in the patch
queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there
at seems like a bit of a whacky criterion to use before reviewing a patch.
wacky?
It favours people who are short-sighted and don't see what possible
improvements their code has. No code in an ongoing project like this is ever
completed anyways.
It favors those who do not wait until the
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
at seems like a bit of a whacky criterion to use before reviewing a patch.
wacky?
It favours people who are short-sighted and don't see what possible
improvements their code has. No code in an ongoing project like this is
ever
completed anyways.
It
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:48 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
What about the delayed fsync patch?
All complete bar two fiddly items, as of Mar 11, design-to-complete
posted along with patch.
Working on those now.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs wrote:
It's probably a good idea to have a queue of those too, to allow others
to finish them if the original author hasn't/can't/won't. I'm not sure
which ones you mean.
At this point, with four days left before feature freeze, if the
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs wrote:
It's probably a good idea to have a queue of those too, to allow others
to finish them if the original author hasn't/can't/won't. I'm not sure
which ones you mean.
At this point, with four days left
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:02 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
they
It would be good to know who/what you're talking about, specifically.
Some patchers may think they have completed their work.
Not a name-and-shame, just fair warning their work is considered
incomplete and is about to be rejected as
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:02 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
they
It would be good to know who/what you're talking about, specifically.
Some patchers may think they have completed their work.
Not a name-and-shame, just fair warning their work is considered
incomplete
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Simon Riggs wrote:
It's probably a good idea to have a queue of those too, to allow others
to finish them if the original author hasn't/can't/won't. I'm not sure
which ones you mean.
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
My assumption is if authors don't finish them in the next few days, they
are unlikely to finish them during some grace period during feature
freeze. And the extra time is usually allowed for changes requested by
committers, while at this point the authors aren't
Perhaps it makes sense to say:
Feature Freeze: April 1st., no new patches accepted for 8.3
Patch Freeze April 15th., Authors have until the 15th to address any
committer concerns
Well, I am OK with that, but we need _community_ agreement on that.
I realize it isn't fair that committers
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:12 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:02 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
they
It would be good to know who/what you're talking about, specifically.
Some patchers may think they have completed their work.
Not a
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Simon Riggs wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:12 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
If everybody knows where everybody stands then we'll all be better off.
There may be other dependencies that need resolution, or last minute
decisions required to allow authors to finish.
Wasn't
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 17:37 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
I realize it isn't fair that committers are behind on patches, while we
are expecting submitters to make the deadline, but there are far fewer
committers than submitters, and there was never a promise to commit
everything before feature
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It favours people who are short-sighted and don't see what possible
improvements their code has. No code in an ongoing project like this is ever
completed anyways.
It favors those who do not wait until the last minute, but complete them
well before
Gregory Stark wrote:
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
That's silly, of course people are still working on them, many of these tasks
are open ended and can be improved as long as we have time. just because
they're still working on them doesn't necessarily mean what they have so far
isn't
Gregory Stark wrote:
In any case I think Simon and you have fallen into the trap of thinking of
development as a single-person project. Most developers here, especially
first-time contributors, don't just work in the dark on their own and turn up
with a finished patch. They have questions and
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My feeling is we should have more regular sync points where the patch
queue is emptied and everything committed or rejected.
No doubt, but the real problem here is that reviewing/committing other
people's patches is not fun, it's just work :-(. So it's no
Right now, all the patches I think are ready for review are in the patch
queue:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a significant number of patches that have are not ready for
review because they
Bruce,
However, with feature freeze coming on Sunday, I am worried because
there are a significant number of patches that have are not ready for
review because they have not been completed by their authors.
Can you flag those somehow?
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
36 matches
Mail list logo
