> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 8:18 PM > To: Sean Utt > Cc: Andrew Dunstan; Joshua D. Drake; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Postgresql Materialized views > > "Sean Utt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > My point is simply this: The lack of a clear formal process for feature > > requests leads to this degradation in the conversation. > > Two comments: > > 1) The existing informal process has served us very well for more than > ten years now. I'm disinclined to consider replacing it, because that > would risk altering the community's dynamics for the worse. > > 2) In the end, this is an open source *community*; no amount of formal > feature requesting will have any material impact on what actually gets > implemented, because there isn't any central control.
Wow. Being new to Open Source, this amazes me. > What gets > implemented is whatever individual contributors choose to work on, > either because they find it interesting or (in some cases) because > someone pays them to do something specific. Certainly, some > contributors pay attention to what's being requested, but I see no > reason to think that increasing the level of formality will help them. What happens when a person adds a feature or changes the architecture of the database that is perceived by some as incorrect or going in the wrong direction? Jon ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster