On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 09:35:40AM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote: > On 05/13/2016 09:28 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 09:12:23AM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote: > >>There was no disrespect intended. I was trying to push forth an idea that > >>multi-company team collaboration is better for the community than single > >>company team collaboration. I will stand by that assertion. > > > >Uh, we are already doing that. EDB and NTT are working on FDWs and > >sharding, PostgresPro and someone else is working on a transaction > >manager, and EDB and 2nd Quadrant worked on parallelism. > > > >What is the problem you are trying to solve? > > Hey, if I am wrong that's awesome. The impression I have is the general > workflow is this: > > * Company(1) discusses feature with community > * Company(1) works on patch/feature for a period of time > * Company(1) delivers patch to community > * Standard operation continues (patch review, discussion, etc..)
Yes, there are some cases of that. I assume it is due to efficiency and the belief that others aren't interested in helping. In a way is a company working on something alone different from a person working on a patch alone? -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
