To: josh@agliodbs.com
cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta 
In-reply-to: <200609011639.42280.josh@agliodbs.com> 
References: <200609012225.k81MPwJ02170@momjian.us>
	<200609011639.42280.josh@agliodbs.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
	message dated "Fri, 01 Sep 2006 16:39:41 -0700"
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 19:50:56 -0400
Message-ID: <26043.1157154656@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> No, it's not.   There's a bunch of patches which we had nothing on -- not 
> spec, not design draft, not anything -- until we got them on July 20th.  
> Our current system is to have only one deadline,

Well, no, it's not.  We have told people till we're blue in the face
"post early, post often".  Now I will plead guilty to not always having
spent as much time giving feedback on draft patches as I should've, but
the process is pretty clear.  As I see it the main problem is people
undertaking patches off in corners somewhere rather than discussing
their work on the mailing lists while they do it.

If you want more process in this we could institute rules like "feature
patches will be rejected out of hand if there wasn't previously a spec
proposal posted to pghackers".  I don't think this is really a good
idea, but I'm not sure what else to do.

			regards, tom lane