Re: next CommitFest - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> I am personally quite tired of
>> reviewing patches for people who don't in turn review mine (or
>> someone's).  It makes me feel like not working on this project.  If we
>> can solve that problem without implementing a policy of this type,
>> that is good.  I would much prefer to run by the honor system rather
>> than having to threaten to drop patches, but only if the honor system
>> actually works.
>
> Organizing contributors on a project like this is like herding cats. Threats
> and penalties are unlikely to be effective. This is essentially a charity
> where people give in ways that work for them, and you take whatever they
> have to give. I'm extremely uncomfortable with the idea of a prescriptive
> system. I've proposed them myself in the past, but I have since come to the
> realization that it will simply drive people away.

I think you're entirely missing the point.  If you want to spend large
amounts of your time reviewing patches from people who won't in turn
review yours, that is *absolutely wonderful*.  It would be a huge help
to the project, especially because you have the ability not only to
review them, but also commit them, an area in which we are hugely
strapped for qualified people who have the ability to commit
substantial time to the project.  I would be more than happy to cut
back on managing CommitFests and reviewing patches and focus on
writing my own patches and letting you fix them up and commit them.  I
have several good, interesting ideas for really cool patches that I
don't have time to write, and they are posted on the developer Wiki if
you'd like to go read them.

Personally, I believe that I take more of an interest in other
people's patches than the average contributor.  I am interested in
reviewing them, and I would be willing to put even more work in
exchange for a commit bit, but that offer has not yet been
forthcoming; maybe some day.  I have done a large percentage of the
management work for both of the last two CommitFests, during which
time I have also reviewed 8 patches. That work was long, hard,
difficult, and time-consuming.  I wish to get something back for it,
and specifically what I want to get back for it is the willingness of
other contributors to review my patches when and if I can get enough
of a break from running CommitFests and reviewing patches to write
them.  I don't find that setting that expectation is either
unreasonable or unfair, and I'm sorry that you and Bruce apparently
feel otherwise.

What I would like to know is - assuming you don't want to do it
yourself, and you don't want to require other *regular contributors*
to do it - then who is going to review MY patches?  Keep in mind that
this is a problem that *does not apply to you*.  You are a committer.
If no one reviews your patch, you will eventually go ahead and commit
it anyway.  If no one reviews my patch, it doesn't go in.  In fact,
even if someone DOES review it, it doesn't necessarily go in, but at
least the odds are better.  Please don't sabotage my effort to ensure
an adequate supply of reviewers unless you have a competing proposal.

...Robert