Gregory Stark wrote:
>
> "Bruce Momjian" <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>
> > Simon Riggs wrote:
> >
> >> It's probably a good idea to have a queue of those too, to allow others
> >> to finish them if the original author hasn't/can't/won't. I'm not sure
> >> which ones you mean.
> >
> > At this point, with four days left before feature freeze, if the authors
> > don't finish them, I doubt someone else is going to be able to do it.
>
> This isn't the standard that we've used in the past. In the past patches that
> are mostly done and need some extra work done to polish them off are
> considered to have met the feature freeze.
My assumption is if authors don't finish them in the next few days, they
are unlikely to finish them during some grace period during feature
freeze. And the extra time is usually allowed for changes requested by
committers, while at this point the authors aren't done and haven't even
gotten to committer review.
> In any case I think Simon and you have fallen into the trap of thinking of
> development as a single-person project. Most developers here, especially
> first-time contributors, don't just work in the dark on their own and turn up
> with a finished patch. They have questions and need help in areas. If you
> insist on a "finished" patch before you even consider reviewing their work
> it's not going to work.
Fine, if they need help, let them ask, but many authors are not asking
for help --- they are just not completing the patches.
Or they are going to surprise us by completing them on March 31.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
