On 2024-04-08 Mo 12:07, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2024-Apr-08, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> And maybe we need to think of a way to further mitigate this crush of
>> last minute commits. e.g. In the last week, you can't have more
>> feature commits, or more lines of insertions in your commits, than you
>> did in the prior 3 weeks combined. I don't know. I think this mad rush
>> of last-minute commits is bad for the project.
> Another idea is to run a patch triage around mid March 15th, with the
> intention of punting patches to the next cycle early enough. But rather
> than considering each patch in its own merits, consider the responsible
> _committers_ and the load that they are reasonably expected to handle:
> determine which patches each committer deems his or her responsibility
> for the rest of that March commitfest, and punt all the rest. That way
> we have a reasonably vetted amount of effort that each committer is
> allowed to spend for the remainder of that commitfest. Excesses should
> be obvious enough and discouraged.
>
I quite like the triage idea. But I think there's also a case for being
more a bit more flexible with those patches we don't throw out. A case
close to my heart: I'd have been very sad if the NESTED piece of
JSON_TABLE hadn't made the cut, which it did with a few hours to spare,
and I would not have been alone, far from it. I'd have been happy to
give Amit a few more days or a week if he needed it, for a significant
headline feature.
I know there will be those who say it's the thin end of the wedge and
rulez is rulez, but this is my view.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
