CommitFest rules
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.
To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!
So please - new patches to the September page!
Regards, Dave
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On 7/3/08, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!So please - new patches to the September page!
But updates to existing patches should be ok?
--
marko
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/08, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!So please - new patches to the September page!
But updates to existing patches should be ok?
Yes.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 20:06 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/08, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.
So please - new patches to the September page!
But updates to existing patches should be ok?
Yes.
Perhaps this would be helpful:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFest:Help
Joshua D. Drake
Show quoted text
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!So please - new patches to the September page!
One of the two patches added post jul-1 was libpq event hooks, which
was a holdover from the june fest -- it wasn't a 'late breaking
patch', just a procedural oversight. It was put there immediately
after reading the 'did we miss any patches' thread on -hackers. Can't
speak as to the other patch.
merlin
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!So please - new patches to the September page!
Regards, Dave
The one I advised be added (the Auto Explain patch) was posted on Mar
29, 2008 (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01214.php),
re-posted the Jun 30th and then an updated patch today... It only
being the 3rd i figured it still meet the criteria. If thats not the
case, I apologize.
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com> wrote:
The one I advised be added (the Auto Explain patch) was posted on Mar
29, 2008 (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01214.php),
re-posted the Jun 30th and then an updated patch today... It only
being the 3rd i figured it still meet the criteria. If thats not the
case, I apologize.
You'll note I didn't actually mention any specific patches.
The CommitFests are designed to be short and quick to complete. We
need *all* patches to be listed (not just posted to a list sometime in
the past couple of months) before it starts, otherwise organisation of
reviewers and completion of the Fest becomes chaotic for all and a
nightmare task for the CommitFest manager.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com> wrote:
The one I advised be added (the Auto Explain patch) was posted on Mar
29, 2008 (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-03/msg01214.php),
re-posted the Jun 30th and then an updated patch today... It only
being the 3rd i figured it still meet the criteria. If thats not the
case, I apologize.You'll note I didn't actually mention any specific patches.
The CommitFests are designed to be short and quick to complete. We
need *all* patches to be listed (not just posted to a list sometime in
the past couple of months) before it starts, otherwise organisation of
reviewers and completion of the Fest becomes chaotic for all and a
nightmare task for the CommitFest manager.
Are you suggesting that omission of a patch on the 'fest' page means
that you are bumped from the fest? Note that Tom asked on July 1 if
there were any missing entries that hadn't been plucked out of the
lists (there were).
If that's the case, that would suggest that it is the patch author's
responsibility to to update the fest entry (or at least, make sure it
was updated). That may already be the case -- i'm not sure -- and I'm
not saying that's wrong, but if you are going to adopt a strict policy
(which btw I have no problem with) it's probably better to remind
stragglers to get with the program a week or so the fest begins,
especially on the last fest of the release cycle.
merlin
"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
Are you suggesting that omission of a patch on the 'fest' page means
that you are bumped from the fest?
No, if you had submitted the patch on time then the correct next step
is to get it added to the fest page; I don't think that should be
controversial. But the reviewers aren't gonna review it if it's not
listed on that page...
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
Are you suggesting that omission of a patch on the 'fest' page means
that you are bumped from the fest?No, if you had submitted the patch on time then the correct next step
is to get it added to the fest page; I don't think that should be
controversial. But the reviewers aren't gonna review it if it's not
listed on that page...
Right, but the author should take some responsibility for ensuring the
patch is listed on time. What we don't want is forgotten patches
getting added at the last minute, right as the CommitFest manager is
wrapping things up having got 95% of the patches reviewed and the
other 5% in progress.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Thursday 03 July 2008 15:12:08 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 20:06 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/08, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.So please - new patches to the September page!
But updates to existing patches should be ok?
Yes.
Perhaps this would be helpful:
Actually, I think we need to be better about linking to that and the various
commmitfest pages within the wiki itself. Right now it's a bit disorienting
trying to find your way around within the wiki itself.... well, maybe I will
get some time to fix that in the next couple of days.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
On Thursday 03 July 2008 18:16:38 Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com> writes:
Are you suggesting that omission of a patch on the 'fest' page means
that you are bumped from the fest?No, if you had submitted the patch on time then the correct next step
is to get it added to the fest page; I don't think that should be
controversial. But the reviewers aren't gonna review it if it's not
listed on that page...Right, but the author should take some responsibility for ensuring the
patch is listed on time. What we don't want is forgotten patches
getting added at the last minute, right as the CommitFest manager is
wrapping things up having got 95% of the patches reviewed and the
other 5% in progress.
I think people are still working there way through the process, but it's
starting to sound like submitting a patch involves two steps from now on;
email to the list, and add your patch to the next commitfest page. Does that
sound right?
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
On Saturday 05 July 2008 18:07:46 Robert Treat wrote:
On Thursday 03 July 2008 15:12:08 Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Thu, 2008-07-03 at 20:06 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/3/08, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.So please - new patches to the September page!
But updates to existing patches should be ok?
Yes.
Perhaps this would be helpful:
Actually, I think we need to be better about linking to that and the
various commmitfest pages within the wiki itself. Right now it's a bit
disorienting trying to find your way around within the wiki itself....
well, maybe I will get some time to fix that in the next couple of days.
Hmm, looks like some of the things I was thinking about have been added
recenelt... cool. One question I have still remains though, on the main
developer page (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information) it
has a link to the "current commitfest", which points to september's
commitfest page. ISTM the current commitfest is July's, since that's the one
we're currently working on. Also, if you're looking to submit a new patch,
the July page also has a link to Septembers page, so you end up where you
need to be; but if you want to see what is currently being worked on, going
to Septembers page has no link to July's page, so you end up having to hit
the search engine to find the right page. So, I'm think that the first link
should point to whichever commitfest page is either actively being worked on,
or will be next to be worked on (the link being updated next when the July
fest closes). Any objections?
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
Hmm, looks like some of the things I was thinking about have been added
recenelt... cool. One question I have still remains though, on the main
developer page (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information) it
has a link to the "current commitfest", which points to september's
commitfest page. ISTM the current commitfest is July's, since that's the one
we're currently working on.
The meaning of "current commitfest" as used on that page is "the place
you should submit a new patch today". I agree there's a terminological
problem here, and we need to somehow distinguish that meaning from "the
commitfest we are currently trying to close out". But you are not
helping matters by trying to eliminate the distinction.
regards, tom lane
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
Hmm, looks like some of the things I was thinking about have been added
recenelt... cool. One question I have still remains though, on the main
developer page (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information) it
has a link to the "current commitfest", which points to september's
commitfest page. ISTM the current commitfest is July's, since that's the one
we're currently working on.The meaning of "current commitfest" as used on that page is "the place
you should submit a new patch today". I agree there's a terminological
problem here, and we need to somehow distinguish that meaning from "the
commitfest we are currently trying to close out". But you are not
helping matters by trying to eliminate the distinction.
Agreed - but Robert does have a point - I know both Greg & I have
resorted to searching to find the in-progress fest page. I'll see if I
can improve the index page a little.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Dave Page wrote:
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 6:29 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
Hmm, looks like some of the things I was thinking about have been added
recenelt... cool. One question I have still remains though, on the main
developer page (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Development_information) it
has a link to the "current commitfest", which points to september's
commitfest page. ISTM the current commitfest is July's, since that's the one
we're currently working on.The meaning of "current commitfest" as used on that page is "the place
you should submit a new patch today". I agree there's a terminological
problem here, and we need to somehow distinguish that meaning from "the
commitfest we are currently trying to close out". But you are not
helping matters by trying to eliminate the distinction.Agreed - but Robert does have a point - I know both Greg & I have
resorted to searching to find the in-progress fest page. I'll see if I
can improve the index page a little.
Just a personal request, but I would like a permanent URL that points to
the in-progress commit page and is only changed when the commit fest of
_over_.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
On Sun, Jul 6, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
Just a personal request, but I would like a permanent URL that points to
the in-progress commit page and is only changed when the commit fest of
_over_.
Well, most of the time there isn't any commitfest "in-progress" at
all. If you want a permanent redirect, how do you expect it to behave
when we are between commitfests?
Speaking of the issue of navigating between commitfests, I agree that
this could use some love.
I mentioned to Alvaro over IM that I was thinking about adding a
navigation bar at the bottom of each commitfest. This would show,
e.g., for the current July commitfest:
<< Previous commitfest | Current commitfest | Next commitfest >>
2008-05 2008-07 2008-09
[closed] [current] [open]
I'm still pondering a way to add this that would require minimal
ongoing maintenance, but I wanted to gauge interest before investing
too much more headspace into it.
Is this something that you guys would find valuable?
Cheers,
BJ
Brendan, all:
I mentioned to Alvaro over IM that I was thinking about adding a
navigation bar at the bottom of each commitfest. This would show,
e.g., for the current July commitfest:
Hmmm. I thought that commitfest-by-wiki was something that we were only
doing until we had the technical requirements for tracking commitfests
nailed down, and then we were going to write a PHP app. No?
--Josh
Dave Page wrote:
it concerns me that despite it being day 3 of the July commit fest,
people are still being advised to add new items to the wiki page.To make the idea work, we need to stick to the rules we defined when
we came up with the concept - specifically, no new patches once the
fest begins!
Where are these rules posted? Personally, *I'm* not clear on them. And
I'm supposed to be the coordinator.
--Josh
On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 3:33 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
Hmmm. I thought that commitfest-by-wiki was something that we were only
doing until we had the technical requirements for tracking commitfests
nailed down, and then we were going to write a PHP app. No?
That sounds good to me, but who knows how long it could take for the
requisite nailing down to occur? Management of patches is a
contentious issue, and any kind of consensus in this area seems to be
elusive.
I figure we might as well make the wiki comfortable in the meantime.
What I'm saying is, I've got the opportunity and the inclination to
make the wiki more usable. If you guys want better navigation,
there's a suggestion on the table to improve that. I'm not too
worried about the wiki eventually being ditched for something better
-- in fact I'm looking forward to it.
Cheers,
BJ
