Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up
Date
Msg-id 20130802212457.GG14543@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Aug  2, 2013 at 02:07:53PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 08/02/2013 01:56 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug  2, 2013 at 04:43:30PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:18:15PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Right cause if a reviewer ends up writing (or cleaning up) all the
> >>>> docs, I would say they deserve very close to equal credit. As an
> >>>> example.
> >>>
> >>> I can do whatever we agree to in the release notes.   The big question
> >>> is whether committers can properly document these people.
> >>
> >> I don't see why not.  Most of them, if not all, already do.
> 
> It is also my thinking that it is the job of the CommitFestManager to
> re-enforce this list by looking through the review list.  If we do this
> on a per-CF basis, the workload won't become substantial; it's only if
> we wait until beta that it gets overwhelming.

Based on existing workflow, we need those reviewer names in the commit
message.  I don't see how the CommitFestManager can help with that.

> The CFM needs to supply the list of "reviewers at the end" anyway.

Why?

> > Most items had 2-3 names, and it was widely rejected.  Of course, these
> > were all reviewers, not just those that changed the code.  I did not
> > have details of which reviewers changed code and which just gave
> > feedback.
> 
> I think "widely rejected" is an exaggeration; a few people objected
> stenuously.  And the primary objection voiced was that people who did
> "it compiles!" shouldn't get equal credit with the original author of
> the patch.  Which we're not proposing to do.

Well, I had to remove it pretty quickly, so that is my recolletion.

> BTW, all of this I'm talking about the 9.4 release notes, where we have
> the opportunity to start from the first CF. There's the question of what
> to do about the *9.3* release notes, which I'll address in a seperate email.

I am worried we are talking about 9.5 as we have already committed quite
a bit to 9.4.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.3 Reviewer Credit WAS: Kudos for Reviewers -- wrapping it up
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: HeapTupleSatisfiesDirty fails to test HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY for TransactionIdIsInProgress(...)