I have to agree. I think that having an expedited review process for small changes (definition TBD) makes sense, but having multiple streams into the codebase would be a major headache.
-
-
Replying to @Xof @AndresFreundTec and
Obviously, it's not without risks. I agree changes that are not obviously correct should be funneled to the list, and committers / reviewers should not be expected to watch GH. If there are volunteers willing to curate the GH queue, why not to give it a try?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Outside of typo-fixes etc there's just about no obviously correct contribution by first timers. It's possible that those would suddenly appear, but I doubt it. And if there's any discussion, how would we guarantee it's archived somewhere under our control?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @fuzzycz and
And why are we discouraging even the small drive-by patches by making the process unnecessary complicated for people not familiar with the PostgreSQL development process?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ascherbaum @fuzzycz and
Well, as I previously said. There's very few first comer contributions that actually can just be applied, and the rest requires discussion. And those need to happen somewhere where others have a chance to intervene. Doing that in GH would mandate committers watching it.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @ascherbaum and
Honestly, I think there's somewhat of an infrastructure/process here (i.e. not having http://contributing.md not auto-closing PRs with referral). But the much larger issue is that there's basically no human resources to do that kind of work.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @ascherbaum and
Just adding more committers itself will barely help IMO (if not regress things) - what we need is committers that have this kind of work as a substantial portion of their day job. And then not get harassed / disadvantaged by doing fewer impressive features.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @ascherbaum and
And that requires resources. I think that's a much bigger issue than "allow github". Unless we have those there'll be not resources to merge trivial stuff either. It's not like there's not plenty of that on the lists.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @ascherbaum and
And I think it's not just committers where such resources are lacking. There's e.g. very little accurate docs for the development process, and related things. And I think that again is because it's largely unsexy to our employers.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @ascherbaum and
Our developer docs are shit, no reason to beat around the bush. Random collection of wiki pages and blog posts in various stages of obsoleteness. If I was a newcomer, I'd be fucking confused WTF am I supposed to do. The TODO list with impossible tasks just adds insult to injury.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
Yea. Totally. I tried to collect dev process links recently to point somebody to them, and I think I just offered them an in-person introduction instead. Too embarrassing. Like I couldn't even understand what some of it was supposed to mean, and I've been doing this for a while.
-
-
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @fuzzycz and
I think we should stop putting such major pieces of informationon the wiki. It's prone to getting out of date, get edits that aren't reviewed, etc. EVEN if a page is accurate and well written, by virtue of so many close-by pages being inaccurate, the content is not trustworthy.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AndresFreundTec @fuzzycz and
Agreed. A good starting point would be to delete much of what's there now, because it's wrong. No info is better than wrong info. A number of our formal policies were recently migrated from the wiki to the website. We should do the same for dev info (and fix it at that time)
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.