On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>> I hear that CF manager is a difficult role for a single individual.
>> So it makes sense to split that role between multiple people.
>
>> I volunteer to be the CF manager for Replication, and also for
>> Performance. ...
>> Patches need an eventual committer anyway, so this is a reasonable way
>> of having the process be managed by the eventual committer.
>
> ISTM that we really want the CF manager to be somebody who is *not*
> directly involved in reviewing or committing patches. It's a distinct
> skill set, so there is no reason why it's a good idea for a committer
> to do it. And we need to get the CF work load more spread out, not more
> concentrated.
I agree it makes sense if a non-committer performs the role. If a
committer does take the role, I would volunteer to split the role and
for me to work on the suggested areas.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
