Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 16:18:03 +0100
From: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr@dalibo.com>
To: Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Commitfest documentation
Message-ID: <20221031161803.396098c8@karst>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJ7c6TNxmP24_+KO43Du3ysNcBqcZjPV=0xUX6fUcuuMvLuCDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20221031115954.5e52ac00@karst>
	<CAJ7c6TNxmP24_+KO43Du3ysNcBqcZjPV=0xUX6fUcuuMvLuCDw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Dalibo
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20221031161803.396098c8%40karst>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Aleksander,

Thank you for your help!
=20
On Mon, 31 Oct 2022 16:51:23 +0300
Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com> wrote:
[...]
> > In the commitfest application, I was wondering today what was the exact
> > meaning and difference between open/closed status (is it only for the
> > current commitfest?) =20
>=20
> Closed means that the CF was in the past. It is archived now. Open
> means that new patches are accepted to the given CF. If memory serves,
> when the CF starts the status changes to "In Progress".

Sorry, I was asking from a patch point of view, not the whole commitfest. If
you look at the "Change Status" list on a patch page, there's two sublist
options: "Open statuses" and "Closed statuses". But your answer below answe=
red
the question anyway.

> There are five CFs a year: in January, March, July, September, and
> November. November one is about to start.

This detail might have a place in the following page:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/CommitFest

But I'm not sure it's really worthy?

> > and between =C2=ABwaiting for author=C2=BB and =C2=ABReturned with feed=
back=C2=BB. =20
>=20
> RwF is almost the same as "Rejected". It means that some feedback was
> provided for the patch and the community wouldn't mind accepting a new
> patch when and if this feedback will be accounted for.
>=20
> WfA means that the patch awaits some (relatively small) actions from
> the author. Typically it happens after another round of code review.

Thank you for the disambiguation. Here is a proposal for all statuses:

 * Needs review: Wait for a new review.
 * WfA         : the patch awaits some (relatively small) actions from
                 the author, typically after another round of code review.
 * Ready fC    : No more comment from reviewer. The code is ready for a
                 commiter review.
 * Rejected    : The code is rejected. The community is not willing to acce=
pt
                 new patch about $subject.
 * Withdraw    : The author decide to remove its patch from the commit fest.
 * Returned wF : Some feedback was provided for the patch and the community
                 wouldn't mind accepting a new patch when and if this feedb=
ack
                 will be accounted for.
 * Move next CF: The patch is still waiting for the author, the reviewers o=
r a
                 commiter at the end of the current CF.
 * Committed   : The patch as been committed.

> Attached is a (!) simplified diagram of a typical patch livecycle.
> Hopefully it will help a bit.

It misses a Withdraw box :)
I suppose it is linked from the Waiting on Author.

> > I couldn't find a clear definition searching the wiki, the mailing list=
 (too
> > much unrelated results) or in the app itself. =20
>=20
> Yes, this could be a tribe knowledge to a certain degree at the
> moment. On the flip side this is also an opportunity to contribute an
> article to the Wiki.

I suppose these definitions might go in:
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Reviewing_a_Patch

However, I'm not strictly sure who is responsible to set these statuses. The
reviewer? The author? The commiter? The CF manager? I bet on the reviewer, =
but
it seems weird a random reviewer can reject a patch on its own behalf.

Regards,