Joshua Berkus wrote:
> Then you can say that politely and firmly with direct reference to the problem, rather than making the submitter feel
bad.
>
That's exactly what happened. And then you responded that it was
possible to use a patch without fixing the formatting first. That's not
true, and those of us who do patch review are tired of even trying.
> Our project has an earned reputation for being rejection-happy curmudgeons. This is something I heard more than once
atMySQLConf, including from one student who chose to work on Drizzle instead of PostgreSQL for that reason. I think
thatwe could stand to go out of our way to be helpful to first-time submitters.
>
I'll trade you anecdotes by pointing out that I heard from half a dozen
business people that the heavy emphasis on quality control and standards
was the reason they were looking into leaving MySQL derived
distributions for PostgreSQL.
I've spent days of time working on documentation to help new submitters
get their patches improve to where they meet this community's
standards. This thread just inspired another round of that. What
doesn't help is ever telling someone they can ignore those and still do
something useful we're interested in.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us