Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > Anyone can create a branch and publish it. That's the democracy that git > allows. So if you want it, don't argue for it, just do it.
The showstopper is having a unified plan for what to put in there, for once, and having -core people (commiters) willing to either put giant effort into review at merge time or to follow the development and take care of the merge themselves as part as commit fests. In a non released branch until the work is complete enough. The idea I tried to express would be to allow pieces of the overall scheme to happen within our usual process. See Itagaki syntax-only patch, and any recent effort on improving subsystems to handle partitioning better (from indexes to foreign keys to COPY to you name it). So having a bunch of people working on their own local branch then publishing it (in the form of patches) is already what has been happening here for some years, with *zero* success. I'm trying to understand what we (as the community) intend to do about it, I'm *not* trying to open yet another private-branch-then-rejected-patch. Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
