Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:46:24 +0000
>> "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we'll have more success convincing patch authors to update a
>>> wiki page, than we'll have to convince reviewers to do so. I know
>>> that's true at least for me. If I want people to review my patch, I'm
>>> ready to sing and dance if that's what it takes. But if there's extra
>>> steps in reviewing a patch, I might just not bother.
>> Well that is what my email is about, dropping extra steps :).
>
> I agree that that's a good objective, but I think a Wiki makes for a
> crappy patch tracker.
Sure, but let's not turn this into a bug/patch tracker discussion,
please :-/. A wiki is not ideal, but it's there.
The main point of my proposal is: let's make the *authors* who want
their stuff to be reviewed as part of a commitfest do the extra work.
There would be no extra work required for patch reviewers.
Sure, we can refine that later. making it easier for patch authors as
well, but I don't think it's an unreasonable amount of work to keep one
line per patch up-to-date in a wiki. The line doesn't need to contain
anything else than title of patch, name of the author, and links to
latest patch and relevant discussion threads, if applicable. And
commitfests are short, you only need to update the wiki a couple of
times during the commitfest.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
