On fre, 2010-01-08 at 21:01 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > > The commitfest is a tool for people to track what is going on, not a > > tool to tell people what to do. > > I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you please elaborate?
The proposal was apparently that a small, vocal group gets to decide what features are more important than others, and then change the commit fest listing to make everyone work on those features instead of some other ones. My opinion is that the commit fest should list everything that was submitted and that participants can decide on their own what is more important to them. > And I thought we had agreement that one of > those ground rules was "don't submit new, large patches to the final > CommitFest in a particular release cycle". No? I don't agree with that or the way it was assessed in this case. The reason why I make these points is that if you make the commit fest too selective, then, since you are not the employer of anyone, people who don't agree with your choices will just ignore them and do something else. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
