X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85339FB1C8 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:25:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21447-08 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:25:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A01E19FA242 for ; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 15:25:18 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k8HIPG6t023651; Sun, 17 Sep 2006 14:25:16 -0400 (EDT) To: Martijn van Oosterhout cc: "Joshua D. Drake" , Gregory Stark , Josh Berkus , pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Neil Conway , Dave Page , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Developer's Wiki In-reply-to: <20060917100538.GA14893@svana.org> References: <200609161225.16961.josh@agliodbs.com> <877j03y50r.fsf@enterprisedb.com> <200609161309.50052.josh@agliodbs.com> <87slirwg7w.fsf@enterprisedb.com> <450C90A0.3090105@commandprompt.com> <15070.1158455724@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20060917100538.GA14893@svana.org> Comments: In-reply-to Martijn van Oosterhout message dated "Sun, 17 Sep 2006 12:05:38 +0200" Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 14:25:16 -0400 Message-ID: <23650.1158517516@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200609/150 X-Sequence-Number: 10728 Martijn van Oosterhout writes: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 09:15:24PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Fortunately, none of the real developers would have to pay any attention >> to any such page ... and you can bet they wouldn't. > If someone wants to spend an afternoon putting up a coherent > description of their wishlist item complete with possible problems and > solutions, then I don't see why we should stop them. Because if they're willing to put any actual effort into it, the right way is to post that same item to the mailing list where it can be discussed. If it survives such discussion (very possibly in a modified form) *then* it belongs on a TODO list. The first problem with a wiki TODO is that it will not reflect any sort of community consensus, only the opinions of whoever edited the page last. The second problem is that setting it up represents a unilateral attempt to redefine (bypass?) the community's design/development process, which is a process that has served us well for many years and is not showing any signs of being broken. regards, tom lane