Re: Commitfest problems - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | David Fetter |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Commitfest problems |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20141216134449.GA19743@fetter.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Commitfest problems (Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>) |
Responses |
Re: Commitfest problems
(Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>)
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:09:34AM +0000, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > On 16/12/14 07:33, David Rowley wrote: > > > On 16 December 2014 at 18:18, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com > > <mailto:josh@agliodbs.com>> wrote: > > > > > Man. You're equating stuff that's not the same. You didn't get your way > > > (and I'm tentatively on your side onthat one) and take that to imply > > > that we don't want more reviewers. > > > > During that thread a couple people said that novice reviewers added no > > value to the review process, and nobody argued with them then. I've > > also been told this to my face at pgCon, and when I've tried organizing > > patch review events. I got the message, which is why I stopped trying > > to get new reviewers. > > > > And frankly: if we're opposed to giving credit to patch reviewers, we're > > opposed to having them. > > > > > > > > I'd just like to add something which might be flying below the radar of > > more senior people. There are people out there (ike me) working on > > PostgreSQL more for the challenge and perhaps the love of the product, > > who make absolutely zero money out of it. For these people getting > > credit where it's due is very important. I'm pretty happy with this at > > the moment and I can't imagine any situation where not crediting > > reviewers would be beneficial to anyone. > > This is exactly where I am at the moment, having previously been more > involved with the development side of PostgreSQL during the past. > > Personally having a credit as a patch reviewer isn't particularly > important to me, since mail archives are good enough these days that if > people do query my contributions towards projects then I can point them > towards any reasonable search engine. > > The biggest constraint on my ability to contribute is *time*. > > Imagine the situation as a reviewer that I am currently on the mailing > list for two well-known open source projects and I also have a day job > and a home life to contend with. > > For the spare time that I have for review, one of these projects > requires me to download attachment(s), apply them to a git tree > (hopefully it still applies), run a complete "make check" regression > series, try and analyse a patch which will often reference parts to > which I have no understanding, and then write up a coherent email and > submit it to the mailing list. Realistically to do all this and provide > a review that is going to be of use to a committer is going to take a > minimum of 1-2 hours, and even then there's a good chance that I've > easily missed obvious bugs in the parts of the system I don't understand > well. > > For the second project, I can skim through my inbox daily picking up > specific areas I work on/are interested in, hit reply to add a couple of > lines of inline comments to the patch and send feedback to the > author/list in just a few minutes. With utmost respect, you've missed something really important in the second that the first has, and frankly isn't terribly onerous: does an actual system produce working code? In the PostgreSQL case, you can stop as soon as you discover that the patch doesn't apply to master or that ./configure doesn't work, or that the code doesn't compile: elapsed time <= 5 minutes. Or you can keep moving until you have made progress for the time you've allotted. But the bigger issue, as others have pointed out, has never been a technical one. It's motivating people whose time is already much in demand to spend some of it on reviewing. I wasn't discouraged by the preliminary patch review process or any feedback I got. My absence lately has more to do with other demands on my time. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
pgsql-hackers by date: