On 7/23/13 12:10 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Apparently it's a little much for experienced reviewers to chew on, too,
> since I've been trying to get someone to review it since the beginning
> of the Commitfest.
It's more than the available experienced reviewers are willing to chew
on fully as volunteers. The reward for spending review time is pretty
low right now.
> While I understand the call for "resources", this is a bit unfair to
> KaiGai, who has put in his time reviewing other people's patches.
If you read Dean Rasheed's comments, it's obvious he put a useful amount
of work into his review suggestions. It is not the case here that
KaiGai worked on a review and got nothing in return. Unfortunately that
has happened to this particular patch before, but the community did a
little better this time.
The goal of the CF is usually to reach one of these outcomes for every
submission:
-The submission is ready for commit
-The submission needs improvement in X
Review here went far enough to identify an X to be improved. It was a
big enough issue that a rewrite is needed, commit at this time isn't
possible, and now KaiGai has something we hope is productive he can
continue working on. That's all we can really promise here--that if we
say something isn't ready for commit yet, that there's some feedback as
to why.
I would have preferred to see multiple X issues identified here, given
that we know there has to be more than just the one in a submission of
this size. The rough fairness promises of the CommitFest seem satisfied
to me though.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com