On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:27:13PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: >> When I came up with the idea of CommitFests they were supposed to be an >> incremental improvement for us to build on. Instead it's remained >> frozen in amber, and steadily becoming less and less effective. I've >> suggested a number of improvements and changes over the years, and >> largely been rewarded with denial, attacks, ridicule, and general >> sandbaggery. I'm done. If the community doesn't think there's a >> problem, then clearly I'm in error for proposing fixes. >> >> Not sure who you're going to get to do CF3, though. I'm not going to be >> CFM again, and I'm pretty sure nobody else wants the job either. > > For what it's worth, I liked how you ran CF 2013-06. It proceeded better than > any CF of the 9.3 development cycle. I can appreciate that it drained you, > though; you tried new things, and your reward was lots of flak. Your > innovations were 85% good; sadly, debate raged over the negative aspects only. > Perhaps that arises from how we deal with code. An 85%-good patch can still > wreak havoc in the field; closing that gap is essential. We say little about > the correct aspects of a patch; it's usually a given that things not mentioned > are satisfactory and have self-evident value. That's not such an effective > discussion pattern when the topic is management strategies.
I couldn't have said it better myself. -- 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
