On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Deciding "WHAT goes in the next release?" is what Committers do, by
> definition.
>
> It seems strange to have a different mailing list for "WHEN is the next
> release needed?", so those two things should be combined.
Core team members have so
+1
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> > purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> > avoidable problems. Theref
On 12 June 2015 at 06:48, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 03:47:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/core/
>
> > After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> > that nobody has mentioned:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 03:47:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/core/
> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
> that's compl
On 06/11/2015 05:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
>>> core position.
>>>
>>
>> I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very good
>> argument t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
>> core position.
>>
>
> I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very good
> argument that FOR such a position in core.
+1.
--
Peter Geoghe
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> I think #1 is the part that we seem to have the most trouble with. It
> seems easily fixable: establish a new mailing list for that task (say
> pgsql-release) and get all the current -core in there, plus the set of
> active committers. Tha
Robert Haas wrote:
> The release process has multiple parts:
>
> 1. Deciding that we need to do a release, either because $BUG is
> really bad or because we have security fixes to release or because
> enough time has gone by.
> 2. Updating translations and time zones and release notes and stampin
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 06/11/2015 11:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
>> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
>> that's completely unlike the others. These are re
On 06/11/2015 11:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
> that's completely unlike the others. These are related to human
> relations:
>
> Acting as a conduit f
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> avoidable problems. Therefore, the core team has written a core charter
> and published it on our website:
>
> http:
On 06/11/2015 10:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
True but that isn't the fault of core outside of communication. The hackers,
reviewers and committers of those patches should be required to communicate
with core in a way that expresses the true severity of a situation so core
can make a:
Management
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
>> However, the core team needs to know when it should initiate a
>> release, and to do that it needs to understand the impact of bugs that
>> have been fixed and bugs that have not been fixed. The recent
>> discussion of multixacts seems
On 06/11/2015 10:10 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Magnus: Committer, primary Windows dude and reviews patches here and
there.
Not sure that's a fair title at this point. Both Andrew and Michael seem
to be doing more of that than me these days, for example. (I do review
patches here and t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
>
> On 06/11/2015 07:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>>
>> Hopefully this will be helpful to people.
>>>
>>
>> I believe the core team is suffering from a lack of members who are
>> involved in writing, reviewing, and committing patches. Those
On 06/11/2015 09:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 06/11/2015 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
core position.
I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very
good argument that FOR such a positi
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> This is crap. I am on the packagers list. Core always asks what people think
> and no it is not always accepted. There have been many times that the
> release has been pushed off because of resources available or new
> information being p
On 06/11/2015 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
core position.
I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very
good argument that FOR such a position in core.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgs
On 06/11/2015 07:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Hopefully this will be helpful to people.
I believe the core team is suffering from a lack of members who are
involved in writing, reviewing, and committing patches. Those things
are not core functions of the core team, as that charter illustrates.
On 06/11/2015 08:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Timing *decisions* are not made by -core, as I've told you in the
past. They are made by the packagers who do the actual work, based on
suggestions from -core.
You have told me that in the past, and I do not accept that it is true.
The suggestions f
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> Timing *decisions* are not made by -core, as I've told you in the
>> past. They are made by the packagers who do the actual work, based on
>> suggestions from -core.
>
> You have told me that in the past, and I do not accept that it is true.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> Yes, and we have recently been discussing how best to solicit those
> opinions this year.
Great!
>> As a non-core team member, I find it quite frustrating that getting a
>> release triggered requires emailing a closed mailing list.
>
> It does
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
>> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
>> avoidable problems. Therefore, the
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> avoidable problems. Therefore, the core team has written a core charter
> and published it o
24 matches
Mail list logo
