Re: Commitfest Update - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jacob Champion
Subject Re: Commitfest Update
Date
Msg-id 34b32cb2-a728-090a-00d5-067305874174@timescale.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Commitfest Update  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Commitfest Update
Re: Commitfest Update
List pgsql-hackers
On 3/31/22 07:37, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:11 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> ... Would it be feasible or reasonable
>>> to drop reviewers if they've not commented in the thread in X amount
>>> of time?
> 
>> In theory, this might cause someone who made a valuable contribution
>> to the discussion to not get credited in the commit message. But it
>> probably wouldn't in practice, because I at least always construct the
>> list of reviewers from the thread, not the CF app, since that tends to
>> be wildly inaccurate in both directions. So maybe it's fine? Not sure.
> 
> Hmm, I tend to believe what's in the CF app, so maybe I'm dropping the
> ball on review credits :-(.  But there are various ways we could implement
> this.  One way would be a nagbot that sends private email along the lines
> of "you haven't commented on patch X in Y months.  Please remove your name
> from the list of reviewers if you don't intend to review it any more."

It seems there wasn't a definitive decision here. Are there any
objections to more aggressive pruning of the Reviewers entries? So
committers would need to go through the thread for full attribution,
moving forward.

If there are no objections, I'll start doing that during next Friday's
patch sweep.

--Jacob



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zhihong Yu
Date:
Subject: Re: Aggregate leads to superfluous projection from the scan
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: doc: pg_prewarm add configuration example