CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Abhijit Menon-Sen
Subject CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Date
Msg-id 20130116082118.GA6000@toroid.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Parallel query execution  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
Re: CF3+4 (was Re: Parallel query execution)
List pgsql-hackers
At 2013-01-16 02:07:29 -0500, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
>
> In case you hadn't noticed, we've totally lost control of
> the CF process.

What can we do to get it back on track?

I know various people (myself included) have been trying to keep CF3
moving, e.g. sending followup mail, adjusting patch status, etc.

I want to help, but I don't know what's wrong. What are the committers
working on, and what is the status of the "Ready for commiter" patches?
Is the problem that the patches marked Ready aren't, in fact, ready? Or
is it lack of feedback from authors? Or something else?

Would it help at all to move all pending items (i.e. anything less than
ready) from CF3 to CF4, just so that the committers have only one list
to look at, while reviewers can work on the other? Only psychological,
but maybe that's better than the current situation?

-- Abhijit



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Abhijit Menon-Sen
Date:
Subject: Re: Review of "pg_basebackup and pg_receivexlog to use non-blocking socket communication", was: Re: Re: [BUGS] BUG #7534: walreceiver takes long time to detect n/w breakdown
Next
From: Jeevan Chalke
Date:
Subject: Re: passing diff options to pg_regress