Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Maybe so, but we routinely have situations where a patch hasn't been
> updated in 3-6 months and we tentatively ask the author if it would be
> OK to mark it RwF, and they often say something like "please keep it
> alive for one more CF to see if I have time to work on it."
Agreed, we don't want that. IMO the CF list isn't primarily a to-do
list for patch authors; it's primarily a to-do list for reviewers and
committers. The case that I'm concerned about here is where an author
submits a patch and, through no fault of his/hers, it goes unreviewed
for multiple CFs. As long as the author is keeping the patch refreshed
per CI testing, I don't think additional work to express interest should
be required from the author.
Now admittedly, at some point we should decide that lack of review
indicates that nobody else cares about this patch, in which case it
should get booted with a "sorry, we're just not interested" resolution.
But that can't happen quickly, because we're just drastically short
of review manpower at all times.
On the other hand, I'm quite willing to convert WOA state into RWF
state quickly. The author can always resubmit, or resurrect the
old CF entry, once they have something new for people to look at.
regards, tom lane
