Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Issues that are discussed and resolved in that forum will very > possibly get brought up again on -hackers and reach a different > conclusion the second time around. Now if people are OK with > that, maybe it's OK I would expect that. Heck, people get that to some degree posting twice to hackers, depending on who pays how much attention each time. To some extent it would depend on how far those doing the reviews would stretch their limits to provide a good review, knowing that someone might do a lot of work based on their advice before a senior PostgreSQL developer will put eyes on it. The expansion of the talent pool that could result is one of the possible "hidden benefits" which might accrue. Other possible benefits could come from simple "sounding board" discussions, non-critical "brainstorming" rounds of discussion, and the synergy of disparate views. Of course, all this assumes that people maintain the appropriate demeanor and put some thought and effort into their posts. > but I have a feeling that could be even more frustrating than the > system we have now. Possibly. We'd certainly need prominent caveats, so that people had the right expectations going in. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
