On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 16:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> But ignoring scheduling difficulties, my point here is that
> it seems like the shorter the cycle, the better, for a lot of
> purposes. Can we do any better than once-a-month, or is that the
> limit given that people need flexible schedules within the fest?
If you want to keep the basic idea of predictable periods of activity
and rest, I think that's as far as you can go.
I'm personally not terribly tied to that; I'm more interested in the
tool support that the CF gives us. I might also like, for example, just
a permanent patch queue with patches sorted by date. Multiple
approaches like that could also very well exist in parallel, even within
the existing commitfest application framework.