Horton

Re: YAML Was: CommitFest status/management

Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Hitoshi Harada <umi.tanuki@gmail.com>
To: Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-12-07T08:14:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
2009/12/7 Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>:
>
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
>> It was written and submitted by one person who did not bother to ask
>> first whether anyone else thought it was worthwhile.  So its presence
>> on the CF list should not be taken as evidence that there's consensus
>> for it.
>
> Should we have "Needs Discussion" phase before "Needs Review" ?
> Reviews, including me, think patches with needs-review status are
> worthwhile. In contrast, contributers often register their patches
> to CF without discussions just because of no response; they cannot
> find whether no response is silent approval or not.

+1. Sometimes a reviewer waits for the consensus in the community when
someone else waits for review (, because it is marked as "Needs
Review").

Regards,


-- 
Hitoshi Harada