Re: Commitfest Update

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Commitfest Update
Дата
Msg-id 549603.1648735901@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Commitfest Update  (Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Commitfest Update  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com> writes:
> In my experience, re-applying an updated patch to a new CF is very easy.
> You can re-attach the existing discussion thread. The only information that
> can be lost is CF-specific fields like reviewer/author which is worth
> re-adding manually.

Yeah.  In fact, it might be a good idea to intentionally *not* bring
forward the old reviewers list, as they may have lost interest.

This reminds me of a point I've been meaning to bring up: it seems to
often happen that someone adds their name as reviewer, but then loses
interest and doesn't do anything more with the patch.  I think that's
problematic because people see that the patch already has a reviewer
and look for something else to do.  Would it be feasible or reasonable
to drop reviewers if they've not commented in the thread in X amount
of time?

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Justin Pryzby
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: CLUSTER on partitioned index
Следующее
От: James Coleman
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Correct docs re: rewriting indexes when table rewrite is skipped