On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 at 23:13, Alex Fan <alex.fan.q@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am new to the postgres community and apologise for resending this as the previous one didn't include patch properly
anddidn't cc reviewers (maybe the reason it has been buried in mailing list for months)
Welcome to the community!
I've not looked at your patch, but I have noticed that you have
assigned some reviewers to the CF entry yourself. Unless these people
know about that, this is likely a bad choice. People usually opt to
review patches of their own accord rather than because the patch
author put their name on the reviewer list.
There are a few reasons that the patch might not be getting much attention:
1. The CF entry ([1]) states that the patch is "Waiting on Author".
If you've done what you need to do, and are waiting for review, "Needs
review" might be a better state. Currently people browsing the CF app
will assume you need to do more work before it's worth looking at your
patch.
2. The CF entry already has reviewers listed. People looking for a
patch to review are probably more likely to pick one with no reviewers
listed as they'd expect the existing listed reviewers to be taking
care of reviews for a particular patch. The latter might be unlikely
to happen given you've assigned reviewers yourself without asking them
(at least you didn't ask me after you put me on the list).
3. Target version is 17. What's the reason for that? The next version is 16.
I'd recommend setting the patch to "Needs review" and removing all the
reviewers that have not confirmed to you that they'll review the
patch. I'd also leave the target version blank or set it to 16.
There might be a bit more useful information for you in [2].
David
[1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/40/3857/
[2] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Submitting_a_Patch
