Re: [9.4 CF 1] The Commitfest Slacker List
Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
To: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
PostgreSQL-Dev <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-06-24T17:53:37Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 06/24/2013 10:48 AM, Claudio Freire wrote:
>>> Reviewer recognition should be on the same level as the submitter.
>>
>> The problem with that is that that HUGELY depends on the patch and the
>> review. There are patches where reviewers do a good percentage of the
>> work and others where they mostly tell that "compiles & runs".
>
>
> Well, you can't so arbitrarily pick who you're recognizing as
> contributor and who you aren't. So why not mention them all? They did
> work for it, some more than others, but they all worked. And since
> whoever submitted a patch (and got it committed) must have reviewed
> something as well, they'd be recognized for both reviewing and
> submitting.
>
Exactly. Just make it a simple policy:
Submitters and Reviewers are listed in that order:
Submitter, reviewer, reviewer
That way submitter gets first bill, satisfying the ego (as well as
professional consideration) but reviewers are also fully recognized.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drkae
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 509-416-6579
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC, @cmdpromptinc
For my dreams of your image that blossoms
a rose in the deeps of my heart. - W.B. Yeats