next CommitFest
The next CommitFest is scheduled to start in a week. So far, it
doesn't look too bad, though a lot could change between now and then.
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
One pretty major fly in the ointment is that neither Hot Standby nor
Streaming Replication has been committed or shows much sign of being
about to be committed. I think this is bad. These are big features
that figure to have some bugs and break some things. If they're not
committed in time for alpha3, then there won't be any significant
testing of these prior to alpha4/beta1, at the earliest. I think
that's likely to lead to either (1) a very long beta period followed
by a late release or (2) a buggy release. I feel like Simon Riggs and
Fujii Masao really pulled out all the stops to get these ready in time
for the September CommitFest, and while I'm not in a hurry to break
the world, I think the sooner these can hit the tree, the better of
we'll be in terms of releasing 8.5.
Just my $0.02,
...Robert
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
You did yeoman work on both --- thanks for that!
Do we have another volunteer to do this for the November fest?
regards, tom lane
*snip*
One pretty major fly in the ointment is that neither Hot Standby nor
Streaming Replication has been committed or shows much sign of being
about to be committed. I think this is bad. These are big features
that figure to have some bugs and break some things. If they're not
committed in time for alpha3, then there won't be any significant
testing of these prior to alpha4/beta1, at the earliest. I think
that's likely to lead to either (1) a very long beta period followed
by a late release or (2) a buggy release. I feel like Simon Riggs and
Fujii Masao really pulled out all the stops to get these ready in time
for the September CommitFest, and while I'm not in a hurry to break
the world, I think the sooner these can hit the tree, the better of
we'll be in terms of releasing 8.5.Just my $0.02,
absolutely, we should be commit this.
we did some testing and things look stable.
also, people would most likely want to build code on top of it in be
ready for 8.5 (support scripts, etc.). this is important in order to
create some acceptance in "user land".
this stuffs seems mature and very well thought.
just my $0.02 ...
regards,
hans-j�rgen sch�nig
--
Cybertec Schoenig & Schoenig GmbH
Reyergasse 9 / 2
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt
Web: www.postgresql-support.de
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
Dave, Selena and I will all be in Japan during the first week of the CF.
I can help after that, but during might be hard. Who else helped with
the last CF? Is someone else ready to be a CF helper?
--Josh Berkus
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009, Robert Haas wrote:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet. Since you've done all
of them since introducing the new CF software, I'm not sure if anyone else
even knows exactly what you've been doing. The transition over to that
was so successful there isn't even a copy of the schedule for 8.5 on the
Wiki itself. Could you find some time this week to rattle off an outline
of the work involved? It's hard to decide whether to volunteer to help
without having a better idea of what's required.
--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
Hi!
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009, Robert Haas wrote:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet. Since you've done all of
them since introducing the new CF software, I'm not sure if anyone else even
knows exactly what you've been doing. The transition over to that was so
successful there isn't even a copy of the schedule for 8.5 on the Wiki
itself. Could you find some time this week to rattle off an outline of the
work involved? It's hard to decide whether to volunteer to help without
having a better idea of what's required.
It's pretty straightforward. Robert has actually done a great job of
communicating about this to the patch reviewers.
I'd be happy to get together at some pre-appointed hour this weekend
(Saturday / Sunday) to talk it over by phone / IRC. PDXPUG was already
planning to get together to review some patches this Sunday from 3-5pm
PST, so that is a convenient time for me.
I can also help with commitfest admin tasks, but not in a dedicated
way until after Thanksgiving as I'm going to be be traveling or on
vacation.
-selena
--
http://chesnok.com/daily - me
http://endpoint.com - work
Selena Deckelmann wrote:
Hi!
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009, Robert Haas wrote:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet. Since you've done all of
them since introducing the new CF software, I'm not sure if anyone else even
knows exactly what you've been doing. The transition over to that was so
successful there isn't even a copy of the schedule for 8.5 on the Wiki
itself. Could you find some time this week to rattle off an outline of the
work involved? It's hard to decide whether to volunteer to help without
having a better idea of what's required.It's pretty straightforward. Robert has actually done a great job of
communicating about this to the patch reviewers.
agreed
I'd be happy to get together at some pre-appointed hour this weekend
(Saturday / Sunday) to talk it over by phone / IRC. PDXPUG was already
planning to get together to review some patches this Sunday from 3-5pm
PST, so that is a convenient time for me.I can also help with commitfest admin tasks, but not in a dedicated
way until after Thanksgiving as I'm going to be be traveling or on
vacation.
I would be interested in helping out as well but I won't be able to
dedicate a lot of time before that timeframe as well :(
Stefan
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
The next CommitFest is scheduled to start in a week. So far, it
doesn't look too bad, though a lot could change between now and then.I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
why we need a full time manager at all?
why not simply use -rrreviewers to track the status of a patch? of
course, we hope the author or reviewer to change the status as
appropiate but we have seen many people including missing discussions
and changing the status of hanging patches...
i guess we can make the commitfest app send an email stating that
reviewer_foo is taking the patch bar, and maybe sending emails after
some days if nothing has happened with that patch... and an email
every week or every few days saying how many patches are, how many are
being reviewed, how many hasn't been reviewed, and so on...
then the remaining work should be not that much, no?
--
Atentamente,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. +59387171157
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote:
why we need a full time manager at all?
why not simply use -rrreviewers to track the status of a patch? of
course, we hope the author or reviewer to change the status as
appropiate but we have seen many people including missing discussions
and changing the status of hanging patches...
Well, actually, that's precisely were I've been putting in a ton of
work - making sure patches aren't left hanging. If reviewers would do
more of that work, this process would run a lot smoother and be much
less onerous for the CM.
...Robert
Selena,
I'd be happy to get together at some pre-appointed hour this weekend
(Saturday / Sunday) to talk it over by phone / IRC. PDXPUG was already
planning to get together to review some patches this Sunday from 3-5pm
PST, so that is a convenient time for me.
Aren't you running OpenSQL this weekend?
--Josh
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote:why we need a full time manager at all?
why not simply use -rrreviewers to track the status of a patch? of
course, we hope the author or reviewer to change the status as
appropiate but we have seen many people including missing discussions
and changing the status of hanging patches...Well, actually, that's precisely were I've been putting in a ton of
work - making sure patches aren't left hanging.
that's why i guess sending automatic mails would be a good way to
remember that a reviewer had a patch in their control or to tell
reviewers/committers there are still patches for review/commit
--
Atentamente,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. +59387171157
Selena Deckelmann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> wrote:
I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet.It's pretty straightforward. Robert has actually done a great job of
communicating about this to the patch reviewers.
That's good to hear. What I was hinting at was that some of the
community knowledge here should start getting written down now that the
process has matured, rather than trying to directly transfer just to one
other person. I'm not sure if Robert has shared 100% of what he does
with the reviewers or not, but in general the easiest way to divest
yourself of a position is to document how someone else can do it. I
don't know that having to poke through list archives or chat with
someone is necessarily the best way to transfer that knowledge.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:06 PM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Jaime Casanova
<jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec> wrote:why we need a full time manager at all?
why not simply use -rrreviewers to track the status of a patch? of
course, we hope the author or reviewer to change the status as
appropiate but we have seen many people including missing discussions
and changing the status of hanging patches...Well, actually, that's precisely were I've been putting in a ton of
work - making sure patches aren't left hanging.that's why i guess sending automatic mails would be a good way to
remember that a reviewer had a patch in their control or to tell
reviewers/committers there are still patches for review/commit
I think an automatic system would probably not be too valuable, but
you're welcome to submit a patch against commitfest.postgresql.org
(source code is published at git.postgresql.org). I'd recommend
proposing a design on -hackers first.
It's easy to generate systems that spew out a lot of email, but the
system doesn't really have any understanding of what is really going
on. When I send out emails to nag people, I actually put quite a bit
of thought into what I say. Sometimes I try to summarize the current
status of the patch, sometimes I add my own thoughts, sometimes I just
fire off a one-liner. I think that adds value, but perhaps I
overestimate myself.
...Robert
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Selena Deckelmann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> wrote:
I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet.It's pretty straightforward. Robert has actually done a great job of
communicating about this to the patch reviewers.That's good to hear. What I was hinting at was that some of the community
knowledge here should start getting written down now that the process has
matured, rather than trying to directly transfer just to one other person.
I'm not sure if Robert has shared 100% of what he does with the reviewers or
not, but in general the easiest way to divest yourself of a position is to
document how someone else can do it. I don't know that having to poke
through list archives or chat with someone is necessarily the best way to
transfer that knowledge.
I'll try to write something up. Stand by.
...Robert
Robert Haas escreveu:
I think an automatic system would probably not be too valuable
I have the same impression.
It's easy to generate systems that spew out a lot of email, but the
system doesn't really have any understanding of what is really going
on. When I send out emails to nag people, I actually put quite a bit
of thought into what I say. Sometimes I try to summarize the current
status of the patch, sometimes I add my own thoughts, sometimes I just
fire off a one-liner. I think that adds value, but perhaps I
overestimate myself.
But I think we should try to have multiple CMs so we don't burn out someone
else. That group (a small one) could do the same job Robert has been done
(AFAICS a very good job) but in a distributed way. I certainly could be a CM
if I don't have to dedicate too much time at the CF month. I don't know if it
would be as effective as it has been done but it will take that weight off our
CM's shoulders.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira
http://www.timbira.com/
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
Selena Deckelmann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com> wrote:
I was just poking around on the Wiki, and it looks like the role of the
CommitFest manager isn't very well documented yet.It's pretty straightforward. Robert has actually done a great job of
communicating about this to the patch reviewers.That's good to hear. What I was hinting at was that some of the community
knowledge here should start getting written down now that the process has
matured, rather than trying to directly transfer just to one other person.
I'm not sure if Robert has shared 100% of what he does with the reviewers or
not, but in general the easiest way to divest yourself of a position is to
document how someone else can do it. I don't know that having to poke
through list archives or chat with someone is necessarily the best way to
transfer that knowledge.I'll try to write something up. Stand by.
Here's an attempt.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Running_a_CommitFest
...Robert
Robert Haas wrote:
Here's an attempt.
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Running_a_CommitFest
Perfect, that's the sort of thing I was looking for the other day but
couldn't find anywhere. I just made a pass through better wiki-fying
that and linking it to the related pages in this area.
Two things look to be true at the moment:
1) The call for reviewers is already running late and needs to start ASAP.
2) Some of the experienced helpers from the previous CFs, like Selena,
should eventually be able to help, just everybody is busy during when
the first round of action has to happen here.
Given all that, I'm thinking that unless we get an enthusiastic
volunteer by tomorrow, I'll kick off the call for reviewers myself and
follow that through to initial patch assignments. I don't expect to
have as much time as Robert put into the last couple of CommitFests
after that, but this one looks smaller and with more familiar patches
than those.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 20:52 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.
You did a grand job and everybody appreciates it.
I feel like Simon Riggs and
Fujii Masao really pulled out all the stops to get these ready in time
for the September CommitFest, and while I'm not in a hurry to break
the world, I think the sooner these can hit the tree, the better of
we'll be in terms of releasing 8.5.
Sprinting is hard and we all need to rest afterwards.
How about we just slow the pace down a little? Nobody wants you to quit,
we just need to set a sustainable pace.
Looking at the submissions so far, it seems you've done such a grand job
at clearing the backlog that there are few patches in the next fest.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:04 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On Sun, 2009-11-08 at 20:52 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
I would personally prefer not to be involved in the management of the
next CommitFest. Having done all of the July CommitFest and a good
chunk of the September CommitFest, I am feeling a bit burned out.You did a grand job and everybody appreciates it.
Thanks.
I feel like Simon Riggs and
Fujii Masao really pulled out all the stops to get these ready in time
for the September CommitFest, and while I'm not in a hurry to break
the world, I think the sooner these can hit the tree, the better of
we'll be in terms of releasing 8.5.Sprinting is hard and we all need to rest afterwards.
How about we just slow the pace down a little? Nobody wants you to quit,
we just need to set a sustainable pace.
I'm not sure exactly what point you're aiming at here, so I'll respond
with a few thoughts that may or may not pertain.
I think it would be really, really good if we could make this release
come out on the schedule previously discussed. 8.4 slipped quite a
bit for reasons that were, IMHO, quite preventable: and, worse, it's
not clear that the slippage really bought us anything, because we
still ended up with a bunch of embarassing bugs. Having said that,
I'm not capable of single-handedly effecting an on-time release, and I
don't particularly want to. In a community where people can disappear
or change roles in the snap of a finger, it's bad to be relying on any
one person to do too much. We need larger, more robust pools of
committers, reviewers, commitfest managers, etc.
Perhaps for next release we should consider spacing the CommitFests
out a little more. I think one CommitFest every 2 months is a little
too tight a schedule. As Peter and others have mentioned previously,
it doesn't leave a lot of time to work on your own patches (behold the
lack of any of my patches in this CommitFest). I think a CommitFest
every 3 months would be too long, but maybe something in the middle.
The trick is to navigate around major holidays while ending around the
right time. Possibly the amount of time between CommitFests doesn't
even need to be constant throughout the release cycle - maybe shorter
at the beginning and longer towards the end.
Looking at the submissions so far, it seems you've done such a grand job
at clearing the backlog that there are few patches in the next fest.
Thanks for your kind words. It does seem that most of the major
patches we've seen so far landed last CommitFest, with the exception
of HS and SR. That's not all me, of course - among other people, Tom
did a tremendous amount of work - but I'm glad I was able to help move
it along.
...Robert
Hi,
On Thursday 12 November 2009 12:46:46 Robert Haas wrote:
Perhaps for next release we should consider spacing the CommitFests
out a little more.
That may lead to quite a bit frustration on the contributor side though. It
can be very frustrating to have no input for a even longer timeframe...
Andres
