Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> We've frequently had, and still have today, committers who are
>> understood to have limited areas of expertise and are given commit
>> bits on the honor system to not break what they don't know well.
>> I don't have any problem with continuing in that line.
> Me neither, but I don't know how far it scales. Having certain people
> who are defined as, say, doc-only committers will not only make it
> clear to those people what they're expected to commit, but also clear
> to everyone else who the people are who might commit any given patch
> they might write. If we just end up with 50 committers and you have
> to follow pgsql-hackers to understand who knows what and which people
> are even still around, it's not going to make anything easier for
> anyone.
When and if we have 50 committers, we can worry about that problem ;-).
But in practice people have different areas of expertise already.
There was some mumbling upthread about trying to identify early who
would be the responsible committer for any given CF submission ---
doesn't seem to me like that is much different.
regards, tom lane
