On Mon, 2025-02-03 at 12:22 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> My interpretation of this is that patches should be moved forward by
> either an author, possibly a reviewer, possibly a committer signed up
> for the patch, or maybe even a colleague of an author who knows that
> the
> author is on vacation and will get back to it in a couple of weeks,
> or
> some similar situation.
I also suggested: when someone does move a patch forward, that they
summarize the current state if that's not obvious from recent messages
on the thread.
There was some concern that it would clutter up -hackers with unhelpful
status messages. I still like the idea: if someone is writing an
unhelpful status message (e.g. no clear next steps or blockers), that's
a sign that they aren't close enough to the patch and someone else
needs to carry it forward. Also, we don't need to decorate the message
with "This is an official end-of-fest patch status message" -- the
message should flow with the rest of the conversation.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
