On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 11/07/2011 09:03 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> I think it's an established principle that the design for features >> like this should, for best results, be discussed on -hackers before >> writing a lot of code. > > You can see from the commit history this idea is less than a month old. Do > we need to get community approval before writing a proof of concept now? > Everyone would still be arguing about how to get started had that path been > taken. If feedback says this needs a full rewrite, fine. We are familiar > with how submitting patches works here.
Eh, obviously that didn't come off the way I meant it, since I already got one other off-list reply suggesting that my tone there may not have been the best. Sorry. I suppose in a way I am taking myself to task as much as anyone, since I have been spending a lot of time thinking about things lately, and I haven't been as good about converting those ideas to a form suitable for posting on -hackers, and actually doing it, as I historically have been, and I'm feeling like I need to get back to doing that more. But I honestly don't care one way or the other how you or Peter develop your patches, beyond the fact that they contain a lot of good ideas which I would like to see work their way into the tree; and of course I do know that you are already familiar with the process. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
