X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 987209FB4CB for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 08:14:13 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 04659-03-2 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 08:14:05 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from fetter.org (start.fetter.org [66.92.188.65]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 422339FB4A8 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 08:14:05 -0300 (ADT) Received: by fetter.org (Postfix, from userid 500) id F21DCF3D3FB; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 04:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 04:14:03 -0700 From: David Fetter To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Peter Eisentraut , "Joshua D. Drake" , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Tom Lane , josh@agliodbs.com Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta Message-ID: <20060902111403.GB27879@fetter.org> References: <200609020341.37691.peter_e@gmx.net> <200609020146.k821k2x08062@momjian.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200609020146.k821k2x08062@momjian.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.151 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200609/116 X-Sequence-Number: 89645 On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 09:46:02PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > It pulls my a mailbox file I use, and it does instant updates as > > > soon as I change it. It is a URL. Why do people care where it > > > is? > > > > The complaint has been that not enough people help with reviewing > > patches. That would indicate that the problem is not location but > > scalability. If everything has to go through your private > > mailbox, then it's not a very obvious process to outsiders. > > Well, you can grab items from there and apply them. I will remove > them from the mailbox when I see the commit. This, in essence, is the problem. You're using the first person singular here, and it's become obvious that one person can't keep up with this any more. The project, thanks in part to your hard work, has grown past that stage. > You have another system that will not be significantly more work? If it's significantly more work spread among many people, that is a perfectly viable solution, just as long as it doesn't cause any one person to be overloaded. We need to get this project more bus-proof, whether it's the patch queue or a server people depend on that's silently down for a week with no ETAs in sight for getting any piece of it back on line. Bruce, are you ready to help create a more bus-proof situation? If so, what specific steps would you like to take in that direction? Cheers, D -- David Fetter http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote!