From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Message-Id: <200705012311.l41NB9O08631@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report
In-Reply-To: <4637A636.90900@dunslane.net>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 19:11:09 -0400 (EDT)
CC: josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> 
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Andrew,
> >
> >   
> >> So if the commercial
> >> backers of PostgreSQL want better management of the project, maybe they
> >> need to find some resources to help out.
> >>     
> >
> > I don't think they really care, or we'd have heard something by now.  I 
> > think this is up to us PG developers.
> >
> >   
> 
> Well, I have no confidence that any formal system will succeed without 
> someone trusted by core and committers stepping up to the plate to do 
> the required ongoing legwork.
> 
> As for voting on patches, that seems a most un-postgres-like way of 
> doing things. What is more, it assumes that multiple people will be 
> reviewing patches. Our trouble right now is finding even one qualified 
> reviewer with enough time for some patches.

The typical use-case is that someone is going to like the patch, but
what X changed in it, so a simple vote isn't going to work, and neither
is automatic patch application.  Rarely is a patch applied unmodified by
the applier.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +