Received: from magus.postgresql.org (magus.postgresql.org [87.238.57.229])
	by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AB76F7659
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 11 Apr 2012 14:28:41 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.22])
	by magus.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <peter_e@gmx.net>) id 1SI1LS-0003Ii-D4
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:28:40 +0000
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 11 Apr 2012 17:28:24 -0000
Received: from a88-115-218-87.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO [10.0.0.108])
	[88.115.218.87]
	by mail.gmx.net (mp020) with SMTP; 11 Apr 2012 19:28:24 +0200
X-Authenticated: #495269
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19Zv1AYd3pZd0t9aFMc/sYvhryWxe46J9sV2RsISK
	dSwZTuCpaLuY6R
Message-ID: <1334165303.25392.9.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Subject: Re: Last gasp
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Greg Smith <greg@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:28:23 +0300
In-Reply-To: <4F85573A.3070807@2ndQuadrant.com>
References: 
 <CA+Tgmoa75QujxzCZC+dj=0+JayGPhJD2kQMDBmbGmmq_HPgHxw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAZKuFbHQA6Q3hO5amMLh6Zvh=-8tdKeQFUacdDVREnvp889Jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F7E99BA.1080805@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<CA+TgmoaRRSyLQ4qaW82aLQ1bM40oJ-eZc0mWXsBF2__xjH4xzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120409053852.GG11987@tornado.leadboat.com>
	<CA+TgmoZphWOJdF7AjBGs1Awf6QM3Gb0e+kvZe4+8-uyBTgSsJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120409222359.GE30702@tornado.leadboat.com>
	<CA+TgmobrGWaatFbuMGJKL4J2AcJCaw3hF-37r8xmxHg7v98smw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFNqd5V274gzVEAX7q=nwGn3eTsPa+B_E_WkQ8oPu1ZEYxa1eg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F83FCB10200002500046D70@gw.wicourts.gov>
	<CAEYLb_W3hOXQYGEA=aJCk-Y-7OFak4V7e3vT1y-XcMukGY3-tQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoY+p8BiRPgCQQdON_a4DQvy3Hx03ug-j2eL8=Za_88WFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEYLb_VUiz57BeDy8d2gWQt_HRn9xpw83gt7MS0+wYmUopasrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZLWG=napMA-Fx4u8PTGDkY2CMz84LXAACsvhKRL+D2vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F84D3A0.8010808@2ndQuadrant.com>
	<CA+TgmoaN2wi85HVS-xuZkw9O6O_RmF4ovxX+=n6o2x6a1S2b-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F85573A.3070807@2ndQuadrant.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-)
X-Archive-Number: 201204/601
X-Sequence-Number: 206404

On ons, 2012-04-11 at 06:04 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> Compare with:
> 
> -Submitter suggests doc change
> -No one has a strong opinion on it, may not be picked up at all
> -Submitter adds to the next CF
> -Wait for review
> -[Possible repost update with reviewer changes]
> -Ready for committer
> -Committer takes time away from code review to look at it
> -Possibly another feedback/review resubmission
> -Commit final versions

I totally get that.

Just as a personal view, if people were to send me doc or "trivial"
patches in git-am format, with proper commit message, and Acked or
Signed-off etc. lines from recognized contributors, and proper
References: mail header linked to the discussion or "suggestion"
message, I could probably commit 20 of those in an hour.

Instead, I have to review the entire email thread for discussion, any
possible reviews or test runs, extract the patch from the email, mangle
it into proper form, apply it, think of a commit message, make sure I
register all the right people in the message, re-review the commit,
push, reply to email, optionally, log into commit fest, find the patch,
click a bunch of times, close it, done -- I think.  That takes 15
minutes per patch, and after two patches like that I'm tired.