Re: ProcessUtility_hook
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>, Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-12-01T02:24:59Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > So, if someone writes a patch, and it is reviewed, and the patch author > updates the patch and replies, it still should be reviewed again before > being committed? Well, that's for the reviewer to say --- if the update satisfies his concerns, he should sign off on it, if not not. I've tried to avoid pre-empting that process. > Also, we are two weeks into the commit fest and we have more unapplied > patches than applied ones. Yup. Lots of unfinished reviews out there. Robert spent a good deal of effort in the last two fests trying to light fires under reviewers; do you want to take up that cudgel? I think wholesale commits of things that haven't finished review is mostly going to send a signal that the review process doesn't matter, which is *not* the signal I think we should send. regards, tom lane