On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 12:34:50PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Michael Meskes wrote: > >> So, as an experiment, call it a mixed result. I would like to have some > >> other way to motivate reviewers than public shame. I'd like to have > > > > Doesn't shame imply that people knew that were supposed to review patches in > > the first place? An implication that is not true, at least for some on your > > list. I think I better not bring up the word I would describe your email > > with, > > just for the fear of mistranslating it. > > If you didn't feel obligated, you wouldn't be pissed at me. You'd just > blow it off (like Bruce did). I think you're angry with me because you > feel guilty.
People are supposed to feel guilty because they are not volunteering enough time, or enough time in the places the community wants? How does that make sense? Doesn't that contradict the term "volunteer"? Also, don't assume everyone has the thick skin I do. I do understand Josh's frustration that something different had to be done. -- 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
