Robert Haas wrote: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php > > Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs. So by my > count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF > schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in > that direction - so I guess that settles the matter? > > I think this is a good illustration of the problems with > decision-making in a community environment - given choices "3" and "4" > most of the votes were somewhere between "3.25" and "3.75". I think, > in general, that when people weigh in with clear opinions, we're > pretty good about moving in the direction that most people want to go. > Even two votes can be enough for a consensus, if they both go in the > same direction. However, when the responses aren't clearly in favor > of one option or the other, or when no-one writes back at all, I think > we tend to flounder.
# Sorry, I could not follow the original thread due to the flood of # message, but I would like to say my opinion. >From our experience in v8.4 development, it is important to handle the last commit fest. At the last Nov, we had three big patches to be reviewed, then we could close the last fest at the middle of next March with postponing all of them. In other word, if we don't have a consensus when the last commit fest to be closed, N-commit fest can grow up (N+1)-commit fest easily. So, now, it seems to me Josh's proposition is reasonable. | We do four CFs, July 15, September 15, November 15, and January 15. | | However, we rigidly apply the 30-day deadline for the January 15 CF. In my reason, it may be a bit short to have only two commit fest remained. At the first commit fest, I got a suggestion to reworks the native PostgreSQL access control facilities, then SE-PostgreSQL should be implemented on the common security abstraction layer. So, if we have only two commit fests remained, it also means I have to provide perfect works without any fails. :( Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei <kai...@ak.jp.nec.com> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
