Re: Patch queue concern
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch queue concern |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 460AC6A8.1050502@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch queue concern (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch queue concern
(Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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 last minute, but complete them > well before the freeze date. But wouldn't it hurt those that are continuously working the patch with the community? Just asking. > >> It's also an artifact of the working model we have where patches are sent in >> big chunks and reviewed much later during a feature freeze. If we were >> committing directly into a CVS repository we would have wanted to commit these >> changes as soon as they were ready for committing, not wait until they're >> "completed". Then continue working and commit further changes. It's only > > This would have CVS containing uncomplete features --- and before beta, > we would either have to beg the authors to complete them, or rip them > out, neither of which we want to do. I agree here. >> I think you should be asking people whether they think the code is in a state >> where it can be committed, not whether they've finished working on it. Just >> because they see further work that can be done is no reason not to commit >> useful patches that are functional as they are. > > OK, but we don't want something that is ready to be committed, we need > it complete. Right, feature complete does not mean bug free that is what the testing period is for. > >> In fact Postgres historically has had an even looser standard. If the code is >> ready to be committed modulo bugs then it's been included in the feature >> freeze in the past. > > Well, if we know something has bugs, we fix them. Things are committed > with bugs only because we don't know it has bugs when it was committed. Yep :) Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: