On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:30:14AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Greg,
>
> > It's more than the available experienced reviewers are willing to chew
> > on fully as volunteers. The reward for spending review time is pretty
> > low right now.
>
> Short of paying for review time, I don't think we have another solution
> for getting the "big patches" reviewed, except to rely on the major
> contributors who are paid full-time to hack Postgres. You know as well
> as me that, as consultants, we can get clients to pay for 10% extra time
> for review in the course of developing a feature, but the kind of time
> which patches like Row Security, Changesets, or other "big patches" need
> nobody is going to pay for on a contract basis. And nobody who is doing
> this in their "spare time" has that kind of block.
>
> So I don't think there's any good solution for the "big patches".
Let me echo Josh's comments above --- in the early years, we had trouble
creating new features that required more than 1-2 weekends of
development. We now have enough full-time developers that this is not a
problem, but now it seems features requiring more than a weekend to
_review_ are a problem, so full-time folks are again required here.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
