On 2013-06-25 10:17:07 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> How should reviewers get credited in the release notes?
>
> a) not at all
> b) in a single block titled "Reviewers for this version" at the bottom.
> c) on the patch they reviewed, for each patch
b).
If the review was substantial enough the reviewer gets bumped to a
secondary author, just as it already happens.
> Should there be a criteria for a "creditable" review?
>
> a) no, all reviews are worthwhile
> b) yes, they have to do more than "it compiles"
> c) yes, only code reviews should count
b). Surely performance reviews should also count, they can be at least
as time consuming as a code review, so c) doesn't seem to make sense.
> Should reviewers for 9.4 get a "prize", such as a t-shirt, as a
> promotion to increase the number of non-submitter reviewers?
>
> a) yes
> b) no
> c) yes, but submitters and committers should get it too
Not sure. Seems like it might be a way to spend a lot of effort without
achieving all that much. But I can also imagine that it feels nice and
encourages a casual reviewer/contributor.
So it's either b) or c). Although I'd perhaps exclude regular
contributors to keep the list reasonable?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services
