Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > This is an interesting observation that deserves to be discussed
> > separately, and relates to the patch queue. Many people want to know
> > what is happening with the patch queue but having better reporting
> > doesn't seem to help much the people who are actually processing the
> > queue, and requires more work.
>
> I'm not sure I follow. I tried last week to give some hours for patch
> review. What actually happened was that I had to wade through a ton of
> stuff, skipping patches that were already applied, threads that were
> purely discussion but not patches, threads about earlier versions of
> some patches.
Yep, that describes the painful process well.
I have tried to stay on top of patches already applied but I am doing a
clock sweep over the queue and you probably caught a spot I was nearing.
The rest is clearly hard to digest. Ideally I could group all related
patches together, and separate the pure TODO items from the patches that
might be TODO items or might be applied. (Though I do need comments on
the pure TODO items too.)
The problem is that I know of no easy way to do that and the time to
doing it is better spent actually processing/deleting items.
> I did manage to find actual patches, but I had then to resort to my own
> mailbox to get the actual patch to apply and review.
You can download an mbox of the entire queue if that helps.
> Now I can't be sure whether the current commitfest is finished or there
> are still patches pending review; what patches could use input from me;
> what patches I could bounce to the next commitfest.
>
> Also I don't know what patches we have for the next commitfest. I would
> gladly give some time to put up a Wiki page to list the patches for the
> next commitfest. Would that be helpful?
Uh, I don't think we have any patches for the next commit fest yet.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +