Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > Josh Berkus wrote: > > Andrew, > > > > > >> So if the commercial > >> backers of PostgreSQL want better management of the project, maybe they > >> need to find some resources to help out. > >> > > > > I don't think they really care, or we'd have heard something by now. I > > think this is up to us PG developers. > > > > > > Well, I have no confidence that any formal system will succeed without > someone trusted by core and committers stepping up to the plate to do > the required ongoing legwork. > > As for voting on patches, that seems a most un-postgres-like way of > doing things. What is more, it assumes that multiple people will be > reviewing patches. Our trouble right now is finding even one qualified > reviewer with enough time for some patches.
The typical use-case is that someone is going to like the patch, but what X changed in it, so a simple vote isn't going to work, and neither is automatic patch application. Rarely is a patch applied unmodified by the applier. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
