On 1/20/16 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah. It's certainly unfair if someone's patch doesn't get reviewed,
but there are only 24 hours in a day, and we have a limited pool of
reviewer and committer manpower. I think we just have to say that
sometimes life is unfair.
I think that's a great way to ensure we shrink the pool of reviewers
when someone works on a patch and then it goes nowhere. I find it rather
difficult to get feedback on ideas before I spend the time to code
something, it's got to be even worse for someone the community doesn't
know. So if we're going to do this, I think there must be a mechanism
for a patch idea/design to be approved.
I think we also need to be careful about -hackers being the only place
feature desirability is measured. There's an entire world of users out
there that aren't even on -general. If some feature doesn't really
interest -hackers but there's 50 users that want it and someone willing
to work on it, ISTM we should make efforts to get it committed.
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com)
To make changes to your subscription: