On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 23:23:20 -0400 (EDT) Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brendan Jurd wrote: > > I'm not saying Bruce is doing a bad job, far from it. I'm saying > > the job is impossible. > > > > I just wanted to correct the apparent impression that "patches don't > > get ignored here". Patches get ignored. The difference between us > > and Apache is we pretend it doesn't happen and don't suggest to > > submitters what action to take when it does. Which puts Apache > > ahead of us IMO. > > The apache group seems to say the patches are indeed ignored, rather > then just delayed --- for us, every patch does get a reply, however > delayed. > Bruce, I think that this comes back to the perception versus reality discussion you and I have had on more than one occasion :). You are correct that we always, eventually reply but, until we do (especially when it takes a long time) it appears as if people are being ignored. I think a FAQ entry may actually be appropriate in this case. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- The PostgreSQL Company since 1997: http://www.commandprompt.com/ PostgreSQL Community Conference: http://www.postgresqlconference.org/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL SPI Liaison | SPI Director | PostgreSQL political pundit
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
