Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > My big point is that we should choose a system that would have had a > > better chance of completing features than what we have used in the past, > > and no one has suggested one. > > > > It is just like the bug tracker issue. Many think we need a bugtracker, > > but when I ask to see a project that has one that is better than what we > > have now, no one responds. Again, the same criteria should be applied > > to this issue. > > > > If people want to do something different with no objective hope it will > > be better, feel free to go ahead and do it, but I can't get excited > > about spending time on it. > > > > I give up. You say "try something else and we'll see what works best." > I respond "great idea.". Then you say "but it won't work anyway." Is it > any wonder people get frustrated? Why give the illusion of an open mind > when you have already made up your mind?
I am saying other people can try a new system, but I don't have time to try something different when no evidence has been given that it is better (just different). > >>> Or try a new system, and I will keep doing what I do, and we can see > >>> which system works best. I realized when I said, "we can try" that I was being inconsistent, but I was just saying that if others want to try something, go ahead. I personally don't see how it will improve things, but if others want to spend time on it, they are welcome to do that. What I am not willing to do is to abandon a system that works for one that doesn't have evidence it is an improvement, and I don't want to spend time on a new system just for the sake of trying to do two systems at once. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
