Message-ID: <46375C0B.9050305@postgresql.org>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 16:26:03 +0100
From: Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
CC: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
 Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>,
	Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
References: <200705011452.l41EqPN10520@momjian.us>
In-Reply-To: <200705011452.l41EqPN10520@momjian.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The bottom line is if you had a system that was 100% perfect in
> capturing all information about a patch, it only helps us 2% toward
> reviewing the patch, and what is the cost of keeping 100% information?

2% for you or Tom reviewing a recently discussed, run-of-the mill patch. 
I suspect that %age will rise as the patch complexity increases and the 
reviewers experience decreases - which is exactly the situation that it 
would help to improve.

Also note that I'm not saying I can produce a system that's 100% correct 
- just one that will capture the posts that keep the patch ID in their 
subject line *automatically* - meaning you don't have to worry about 
keeping threads for the existing queue or tracking the patch status.

Regards Dave