Tom,
>> If no-one really cares enough about a patch to review it, mark it
>> as "rejected, because no-one but the patch author cares". Harsh,
>> but that's effectively what pushing to the next commitfest means
>> anyway.
>
> Well, that could be the problem, but it's also possible that no one
> could get to it in the alloted CF timeframe. Maybe the
> best-qualified reviewers were on vacation, or maybe there were just
> too many patches. I could see bouncing a patch on this basis if it
> doesn't get touched for, say, two consecutive CFs.
That would be more or less a declaration of failure by this project to
regulate our own development process, and an abandonment of the idea of
ever getting new contributors. If we don't guarantee legit patches at
least one review, why would anyone submit code to this project at all?
At some point folks on this list are going to admit that we have a
serious problem with reviews and reviewers, and that it's worth a
project-wide effort to do something about it. Apparently that day
hasn't come yet; most people are still in denial.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
