Thread: ready for another patch

I'm ready for another patch.

However, if it's complicated at all, it might take me a week or so for
the initial review.

    Jeff

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Jeff Davis<pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> I'm ready for another patch.
>
> However, if it's complicated at all, it might take me a week or so for
> the initial review.

OK, how about "prefix support for synonym dictionary".

There aren't actually too many patches without assigned reviewers at
this point, but there are a lot of patches where either the reviewing
hasn't been completed yet or the author hasn't yet updated the patch.
Not sure how we're going to handle those yet, but that's going to be
the next challenge once we get these last few assigned.

...Robert

On Sat, 2009-07-25 at 16:25 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> OK, how about "prefix support for synonym dictionary".

Ok, I'll get on it.

> There aren't actually too many patches without assigned reviewers at
> this point, but there are a lot of patches where either the reviewing
> hasn't been completed yet or the author hasn't yet updated the patch.
> Not sure how we're going to handle those yet, but that's going to be
> the next challenge once we get these last few assigned.

Maybe it would be useful if the application could highlight anything
where it's "waiting for review" or "waiting for author" for more than a
few days. If good progress is being made, the timer could be reset. If
not, you can assign another reviewer or bounce the patch to the next
commitfest, respectively.

That's just an idea to help track the information a little better, it
doesn't solve the underlying problem.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis

On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Jeff Davis<pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> Maybe it would be useful if the application could highlight anything
> where it's "waiting for review" or "waiting for author" for more than a
> few days. If good progress is being made, the timer could be reset. If
> not, you can assign another reviewer or bounce the patch to the next
> commitfest, respectively.
>
> That's just an idea to help track the information a little better, it
> doesn't solve the underlying problem.

Yes - this is pretty much what I've been doing manually.  The problem
is that this is a bit circular.  If people don't review patches, then
that patch is stuck in limbo AND that reviewer is not available to
assign to another patch that might be thereby dislodged from limbo.
Also the fire has died down a little bit: not everyone who volunteered
to review a first patch has come back and asked for a second or third
one.

...Robert