On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 10:04:08AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Bruce, > > > There are three issues here: > > > > 1. What will best motive reviewers? > > 2. What is a reasonable effort to accomplish #1? > > 3. What is acceptable for release note readers? > > > > You seem to be only focused on #1, and you don't want to address the > > other items --- that's fine --- I will still be around if people lose > > interest or the system becomes unworkable. > > Both I and other people have already addressed #2 and #3. You're also > having a huge failure of perspective here. Motivating reviewers allows > our project to continue developing PostgreSQL. Items 2 and 3 are so > insignificant in comparison to that as to not be worth discussing.
OK, my analysis was accurate then --- for you, #1 overshadows numbers 2 and 3. I don't share those priorities, and the work required is unbounded (no #2), so I will not perform additional work to help with #1. > In the novels The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, there's a spaceship > which has been waiting 1000 years to take off because it's waiting for a > load of lemon-soaked paper napkins to be loaded. You are being Mr. > Lemon-Soaked Paper Napkin. Actually, for me, motiving reviewers seems like the Lemon-Soaked Paper Napkins, as it requires unbounded effort and its importance is not being balanced with other priorities. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
