On 1/20/16 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Yeah. It's certainly unfair if someone's patch doesn't get reviewed, but there are only 24 hours in a day, and we have a limited pool of reviewer and committer manpower. I think we just have to say that sometimes life is unfair.
I think that's a great way to ensure we shrink the pool of reviewers when someone works on a patch and then it goes nowhere. I find it rather difficult to get feedback on ideas before I spend the time to code something, it's got to be even worse for someone the community doesn't know. So if we're going to do this, I think there must be a mechanism for a patch idea/design to be approved.
I think we also need to be careful about -hackers being the only place feature desirability is measured. There's an entire world of users out there that aren't even on -general. If some feature doesn't really interest -hackers but there's 50 users that want it and someone willing to work on it, ISTM we should make efforts to get it committed.
-- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
