MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4B2C8123.1030409@2ndquadrant.com>
References: <4B27C70F.1030603@2ndquadrant.com>
	<603c8f070912151012n60e8b963t69ef79577114d505@mail.gmail.com>
	<4B27E724.9000908@2ndquadrant.com> <4B2BD57A.2050505@2ndquadrant.com>
	<4B2C8123.1030409@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:07:59 +0000
Message-ID: <937d27e10912190107v6690bc83w34f7ad49875160d2@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Closing out CommitFest 2009-11
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thanks Greg - nice job! :-)

On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> CommitFest 2009-11 is now closed, having committed 27 patches in 33 days.
> =A0For comparison sake, 2009-09 committed 20 patches in 29 days, 2009-07 =
37
> patches in 34 days, and 2008-09 29 patches in 30 days. =A0The much bigger
> 2008-11 involved 58 patches going on for months, the bulk of it committed=
 28
> patches in 36 days.
>
> Seems pretty consistent at this point: =A0at the average patch contributi=
on
> size seen over the last year, about one of those gets committed per day o=
nce
> we enter a CommitFest. =A0I didn't bother accounting for things that were
> committed outside of the official dates, so it's actually a bit worse tha=
n
> that, but that gives a rough idea that's easy to remember.
>
> Also, just based on the last three CFs, 42% of patches are either returne=
d
> with feedback or rejected (with quite a bit more CF to CF variation). =A0=
The
> working estimation figure I'd suggest is that once a CF reaches 50 incomi=
ng
> patches it's unlikely that will finish in a month.
>
> CommitFest 2010-01, the last one for 8.5, begins on January 15th, 2010.
> =A0I'll be out of commission with projects by then, so unless Robert want=
s to
> reprise his role as CF manager we may need to get someone else involved t=
o
> do it. =A0Between the CF application and how proactive everyone involved =
is at
> this point (almost all authors, reviewers, and committers do the bulk of =
the
> state changes and link to messages in the archives for you), the job of
> running things does keep getting easier. =A0And the guidlines for how to =
be
> the CF manager are pretty nailed down now--you could just execute on a
> pretty mechanical plan and expect to make useful progress. =A0It's still =
a lot
> of time though. =A0I've never had an appreciation for exactly how many
> messages flow through this list like I do now, after a month of needing t=
o
> read and pay attention to every single one of them.
>
> For those of you still furiously working on a patch with that deadline, i=
f
> you have a large patch and it's not already been reviewed in a previous
> CommitFest, I wouldn't give you good odds of it being even looked at duri=
ng
> that one. =A0There doesn't seem to be any official warning of this where
> people will likely notice it, but this topic has been discussed on the li=
st
> here. =A0Large patches submitted just before the deadline for a release h=
ave
> not fared very well historically. =A0Recognizing that, there's really no
> tolerance for chasing after them (at the expense of postponing the beta)
> left for this release. =A0Just figured I'd pass along that warning before
> somebody discovers it the hard way, by working madly to finish their
> submission up only to see it get kicked to the next version anyway.
>
> --
> Greg Smith =A0 =A02ndQuadrant =A0 Baltimore, MD
> PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
> greg@2ndQuadrant.com =A0www.2ndQuadrant.com
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>


--=20
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com