On Fri, 2009-11-13 at 08:33 +0000, Dave Page wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 2:15 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> >> Personally, I would not propose to impose this rule of first-time
> >> contributors, or even second-time contributors. But by about patch #3
> >> I think everyone should be pitching in.
> >
> > I hate to ask, but how would we enforce this? Do we no longer apply
> > patches for 3rd-time submitters who have not reviewed? That seems to be
> > hurting us more than them. Are we prepared to discard valid patches
> > for this reason?
>
> What about people who contribute hours and hours of their time in
> other ways? Are they required to contribute even more of their time to
> review as well, just to help their own occasional code contributions
> get through the process?
Yes, but the rule needs to be hard for a few reasons. If your employer
encourages you to write a patch then they need to be made aware that you
must also do all the other things too: write docs, supply tests, explain
it *and* include review time. Since reviewing your own patch isn't
possible, we must require patch review of other's patches. The rule is
deliberately hard on the contributor to ensure the sponsor understands
the rule and allows more time.
I don't expect it to need to be enforced. If everybody understands it
will be enforced and that there will be some polite reminders, then it
will likely never need to be enforced.
For me, reviewing patches is a great way to learn how to code properly,
learn PostgreSQL and get new ideas.
All the CF manager needs to do is ensure that every patch submitted
chalks up one review. If you think about it, we wouldn't actually need
any rr reviewers at all then, because if we have 20 patches we would
have 20 reviews due. So the whole scheme is self-balancing.
-- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
