On Sat, Oct 02, 2021 at 12:20:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2021-Oct-02, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > Yeah. I have been thinking of looking through the oldest CF entries
> > and proposing that we just reject any that look permanently stalled.
> > It doesn't do much good to leave things in the list when there's
> > no apparent interest in pushing them to conclusion. But I've not
> > done the legwork yet, and I'm a little worried about the push-back
> > that will inevitably result.
>
> I was just going to say the same thing yesterday, and reference [1]
> when I did it once in 2019. I think it was a useful cleanup exercise.
> In hindsight, some of these patches were resubmitted later, and those
> are either still ongoing or are already committed.
> [1] https://postgr.es/m/20190930182818.GA25331@alvherre.pgsql
>
>
> (I did have the luxury of a local copy of the commitfest database, which
> is perhaps a service we could offer to CFMs to make their lives easier.)
>
Right now, an option to bulk move everything in their current states to
Next CF would be handy... There are still 139 remaining patches to move.
11 of them "Ready for Committer"
--
Jaime Casanova
Director de Servicios Profesionales
SystemGuards - Consultores de PostgreSQL
