Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Selena Deckelmann wrote: On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I'm game, though I'm hoping not to become the guy who spends all his time doing release planning, because I like writing code, too. Hopefully Selena won't mind my mentioning that she sent me a private email expressing some interest in this area, too. Not at all! My schedule is largely open this fall and winter, and I have a patch or two that I aught to finish soonish as well. FYI, my schedule in the next few months is not good. I just returned from 19 days of traveling (mostly vacation), and will be attending conferences two weeks in October and two weeks in November. -- Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com writes: We also very occasionally step in and make a decision if -hackers (or another group) is deadlocked over an issue. For example, the whole 'change the name' debate. I wouldn't really hold that up as a shining example of a core decision. :) The point of core's action then was to put a stop to an unproductive flamewar. Which it did. Could we please not restart that? regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 We also very occasionally step in and make a decision if -hackers (or another group) is deadlocked over an issue. For example, the whole 'change the name' debate. I wouldn't really hold that up as a shining example of a core decision. :) Heck, I still can't understand it - the majority of core is decidely for changing the name back to Postgres (some adamantly so), but somehow as a committee they manage to reach the opposite conclusion? Time to start lobbying for the name change again I suppose. As Bruce said two years ago in August 2007: quote What I think we will find in two years it that many will wish we had made the change pre-8.3 because in two years we will be even more entrenched than we are now. The bottom line is that the pronunciation/marketing problem with the name PostgreSQL is not going to change --- it is only going to get worse. /quote - -- Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200909102043 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iEYEAREDAAYFAkqpnr8ACgkQvJuQZxSWSsht+ACfeD+Cy/uG4a+zMQEwSvahao5i jNAAniSu/y7vazK+L9cKGQTHlQaGw8Pa =eeVM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Greg, Time to start lobbying for the name change again I suppose. As Bruce said two years ago in August 2007: Man, you are a masochist, aren't you? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 07:22:27PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Josh Berkusj...@agliodbs.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. Having recently been immersed in the issues of the Perl 5 community, I'm going to disagree and say that having a singular release manager would be a bad idea. While an autocrat is a more rapid decision-maker, he or she can also be a bottleneck ... and frequently is. I do think that we (core) should show more leadership in enforcing the deadlines that the hackers have already agreed on. I was going to say that I'm perfectly fine with having an all-powerful release manager, as long as it's me. Seeing your performance and involvement in the project so far, I would be ready to agree with you here ;) I don't really think we need to invest that much authority in one person, however - and certainly not without more of a clearly-defined mandate for exactly what that person is supposed to do with that authority. What I really think we need is, as you say, more leadership in enforcing the agreed-upon deadlines, and along with that, more leadership in setting the deadlines (and other parameters) in the first place. However, I'm not sure that that group should be coterminous with core. For example, this is something that I'm pretty interested in helping with, and I am obviously not a core team member. However, I'm not asking for an exception just for me: I think that generally it's in the best interest of the project to recruit MORE people to help with this work, and if we say that it is the responsibility of core, then we're confining it to a group of seven people of whom only five are regularly active on -hackers. And several of those people are committers who I would guess are somewhat overworked already. I agree, I see no reason for core being the one group to enforce deadlines. Put together a release team and have it take care of enforcing deadlines (ruthlessly if need be). Kristian. -- Kristian LarssonKLL-RIPE +46 704 264511k...@spritelink.net -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 07:44 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On ons, 2009-09-02 at 12:52 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? The core team has historically been the release *maker* and has some done management of the final phases of that process. But I think the sentiment is growing that we need more management throughout the entire release cycle. O.k. so a release team. Cool. I am assuming the team would be more directed toward upcoming major release versus minor releases to past revisions. We already pretty much have that under control between -core and -packagers. Yes? Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Joshua D. Drakej...@commandprompt.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 07:44 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On ons, 2009-09-02 at 12:52 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? The core team has historically been the release *maker* and has some done management of the final phases of that process. But I think the sentiment is growing that we need more management throughout the entire release cycle. O.k. so a release team. Cool. I am assuming the team would be more directed toward upcoming major release versus minor releases to past revisions. We already pretty much have that under control between -core and -packagers. Yes? +1. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 11:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Joshua D. Drakej...@commandprompt.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 07:44 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On ons, 2009-09-02 at 12:52 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? The core team has historically been the release *maker* and has some done management of the final phases of that process. But I think the sentiment is growing that we need more management throughout the entire release cycle. O.k. so a release team. Cool. I am assuming the team would be more directed toward upcoming major release versus minor releases to past revisions. We already pretty much have that under control between -core and -packagers. Yes? +1. O.k. so the second part of this, is I feel it should contain a majority of people who are not already being slammed into the ground by community work. E.g; let's get some fresh blood. It is certainly important to have a couple of long standing contributors involved but we have some people that have cropped up recently (relatively) within our community that could probably be overworked a bit more ;) Joshua D. Drake /me pokes Robert Haas and Kevin Grittner ...Robert -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Joshua D. Drakej...@commandprompt.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 11:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Joshua D. Drakej...@commandprompt.com wrote: On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 07:44 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On ons, 2009-09-02 at 12:52 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? The core team has historically been the release *maker* and has some done management of the final phases of that process. But I think the sentiment is growing that we need more management throughout the entire release cycle. O.k. so a release team. Cool. I am assuming the team would be more directed toward upcoming major release versus minor releases to past revisions. We already pretty much have that under control between -core and -packagers. Yes? +1. O.k. so the second part of this, is I feel it should contain a majority of people who are not already being slammed into the ground by community work. E.g; let's get some fresh blood. It is certainly important to have a couple of long standing contributors involved but we have some people that have cropped up recently (relatively) within our community that could probably be overworked a bit more ;) Joshua D. Drake /me pokes Robert Haas and Kevin Grittner Yeah, I'm game, though I'm hoping not to become the guy who spends all his time doing release planning, because I like writing code, too. Hopefully Selena won't mind my mentioning that she sent me a private email expressing some interest in this area, too. And /me pokes Brendan Jurd. :-) ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 12:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: O.k. so the second part of this, is I feel it should contain a majority of people who are not already being slammed into the ground by community work. E.g; let's get some fresh blood. It is certainly important to have a couple of long standing contributors involved but we have some people that have cropped up recently (relatively) within our community that could probably be overworked a bit more ;) Joshua D. Drake /me pokes Robert Haas and Kevin Grittner Yeah, I'm game, though I'm hoping not to become the guy who spends all his time doing release planning, because I like writing code, too. Of course. Hopefully Selena won't mind my mentioning that she sent me a private email expressing some interest in this area, too. She would definitely be a good option if she has time. I know that I would be interested and I would like to see at least one long time -hacker on board. And /me pokes Brendan Jurd. :-) Hah! I almost listed him. /me adds a poke to Brendan Jurd. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com wrote: /me pokes Robert Haas and Kevin Grittner I'm honored to be suggested for such a role. I'm happy to do what I can, but am reluctant to put myself too squarely in any critical path, as I have responsibility for dealing with some family health issues which make unpredictable demands on my free time and energy. If things can be arranged so that what I *can* do contributes, but my absence at times does no harm, I'm happy to help. Robert Haas is obviously an outstanding suggestion. -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I'm game, though I'm hoping not to become the guy who spends all his time doing release planning, because I like writing code, too. Hopefully Selena won't mind my mentioning that she sent me a private email expressing some interest in this area, too. Not at all! My schedule is largely open this fall and winter, and I have a patch or two that I aught to finish soonish as well. -selena -- http://chesnok.com/daily - me http://endpoint.com - work -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. So I think it would make sense for you guys to do Alpha2. Agreed, Peter? -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 10:21 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. So I think it would make sense for you guys to do Alpha2. Agreed, Peter? I think we need at least one long term contributor or core member to participate in this. Peter would you be up for a Liaison to Core and active release person? Joshua D. Drake -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Josh Berkusj...@agliodbs.com wrote: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. So I think it would make sense for you guys to do Alpha2. Agreed, Peter? I have no interest in that. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Josh Berkusj...@agliodbs.com wrote: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. So I think it would make sense for you guys to do Alpha2. Agreed, Peter? I'm up for it! :) Like Robert as expressed on other management roles, I am not interested in doing it forever. I am certainly up for being part of a rotating team, and documenting/automating things as much as possible. -selena -- http://chesnok.com/daily - me http://endpoint.com - work -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote: So I think it would make sense for you guys to do Alpha2. I'm not really clear on what that means. I'm assuming that part of the goal is for us to become more intimately familiar with the details of putting together a release, documenting the process, and suggesting possible process improvements. But I think I need a little more of a broad outline, at least, of what would fall to this team. Are we talking about taking things from the end of the CF up to the point of publishing the alpha release files? We would try to cover, to the extent we can, the jobs normally done in a major release by Tom, Bruce, and others? (Partly to free them to do other work during the alpha release preparation?) Or am I totally off base in what you're talking about? -Kevin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. Uh, what's the point of that? The existing core team has that process perfectly well in hand. What I thought this discussion was about was putting more effort into long-range project planning/management. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. Uh, what's the point of that? The existing core team has that process perfectly well in hand. What I thought this discussion was about was putting more effort into long-range project planning/management. Exactly. I don't see much value in investing a lot of time and effort in something that's already working well. If someone has a complaint about the way the process for packaging and bundling releases is working, then let's hear it (on a separate thread!), but all of the discussions that we've had on this thread are about making sure that we set time lines and expectations early, stick to them, and resolve issues that come up in a timely fashion. Those are basically all process issues, and I don't see much value in throwing one technical task into the mix. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote: Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes: Selena, Robert, Brendan, Kevin, One of the ideas behind the Alpha releases was to give someone other than the core team some practice doing releases. Uh, what's the point of that? The existing core team has that process perfectly well in hand. What I thought this discussion was about was putting more effort into long-range project planning/management. Ok! I was volunteering for work, not suggesting a process was broken. There's plenty to do around commitfest, so I'll stick to taking tasks there! -selena -- http://chesnok.com/daily - me http://endpoint.com - work -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote: She would definitely be a good option if she has time. I know that I would be interested and I would like to see at least one long time -hacker on board. I don't presume to be a long time -hacker, but I'm interested in what I can do to help with this. I like the general approach. I'm also up for being involved in 'managing' beta testers. Not sure if that role would be appropriate for this group, though it seems like it'd be a natural fit as it's directly related to the is the release ready question.. Just my 2c. Thanks, Stephen signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
2009/9/4 Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com: On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 12:00 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: And /me pokes Brendan Jurd. :-) Hah! I almost listed him. /me adds a poke to Brendan Jurd. /me stirs from sleep to announce huh? whaddyawant? Seriously though, I have been keeping an eye on this thread, and I think it's heading in an interesting and positive direction. Still I'm a little unclear on what would be expected of, and indeed what I could contribute to, the release team effort. So far in the thread I've seen mention of deciding/announcing/enforcing project deadlines, managing commit fests, beta testing and beta-to-release items. Is that about the right idea? Cheers, BJ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Robert Haas wrote: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs. So by my count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in that direction - so I guess that settles the matter? I think this is a good illustration of the problems with decision-making in a community environment - given choices 3 and 4 most of the votes were somewhere between 3.25 and 3.75. I think, in general, that when people weigh in with clear opinions, we're pretty good about moving in the direction that most people want to go. Even two votes can be enough for a consensus, if they both go in the same direction. However, when the responses aren't clearly in favor of one option or the other, or when no-one writes back at all, I think we tend to flounder. # Sorry, I could not follow the original thread due to the flood of # message, but I would like to say my opinion. From our experience in v8.4 development, it is important to handle the last commit fest. At the last Nov, we had three big patches to be reviewed, then we could close the last fest at the middle of next March with postponing all of them. In other word, if we don't have a consensus when the last commit fest to be closed, N-commit fest can grow up (N+1)-commit fest easily. So, now, it seems to me Josh's proposition is reasonable. | We do four CFs, July 15, September 15, November 15, and January 15. | | However, we rigidly apply the 30-day deadline for the January 15 CF. In my reason, it may be a bit short to have only two commit fest remained. At the first commit fest, I got a suggestion to reworks the native PostgreSQL access control facilities, then SE-PostgreSQL should be implemented on the common security abstraction layer. So, if we have only two commit fests remained, it also means I have to provide perfect works without any fails. :( Thanks, -- OSS Platform Development Division, NEC KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Robert Haas wrote: I think this is a good illustration of the problems with decision-making in a community environment - given choices 3 and 4 most of the votes were somewhere between 3.25 and 3.75. I think, in general, that when people weigh in with clear opinions, we're pretty good about moving in the direction that most people want to go. Even two votes can be enough for a consensus, if they both go in the same direction. However, when the responses aren't clearly in favor of one option or the other, or when no-one writes back at all, I think we tend to flounder. I think it should be up to whoever is the commitfest or release manager to decide how he/she wants to manage them. That includes deciding how many of them there is, when they start and when they end. Others can give suggestions, plea for extensions, and whine. With that power comes the responsibility to kick the right people at the right times to make the schedule stick and get the release out of the door. That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? +1 on both points. -selena -- http://chesnok.com/daily - me http://endpoint.com - work -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 12:50 -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? +1 on both points. Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? Joshua D. Drake -selena -- http://chesnok.com/daily - me http://endpoint.com - work -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Joshua D. Drake escribió: On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 12:50 -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? +1 on both points. Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? Core is a decision-making committee. A release manager is a person, maybe two, but a committee doesn't work (unless they'd split up tasks in tickets and have them assigned etc, but I don't see -core doing that.) -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Alvaro Herreraalvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 12:50 -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? +1 on both points. Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? Core is a decision-making committee. A release manager is a person, maybe two, but a committee doesn't work (unless they'd split up tasks in tickets and have them assigned etc, but I don't see -core doing that.) Previous emails from Tom seem to indicate that the mandate of -core is mostly to decide things like the timing of releases. If we gave that job to somebody else, would there be anything left for -core to do? If so, what? And on the flip side, it is precisely because of the lack of a clear statement on release timing from -core that we're having these discussions here on -hackers. Personally, I think that's better, since -core is a private list (why?) to which most of us don't have access, and I don't see any reason why decisions like this can't be made in public. The only -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Alvaro Herreraalvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 12:50 -0700, Selena Deckelmann wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Heikki Linnakangasheikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com wrote: That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. I'm very happy with the way you ran the first commitfest. Thank you. Want to manage the rest as well? +1 on both points. Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? Core is a decision-making committee. A release manager is a person, maybe two, but a committee doesn't work (unless they'd split up tasks in tickets and have them assigned etc, but I don't see -core doing that.) Previous emails from Tom seem to indicate that the mandate of -core is mostly to decide things like the timing of releases. If we gave that job to somebody else, would there be anything left for -core to do? If so, what? And on the flip side, it is precisely because of the lack of a clear statement on release timing from -core that we're having these discussions here on -hackers. Personally, I think that's better, since -core is a private list (why?) to which most of us don't have access, and I don't see any reason why decisions like this can't be made in public. The only Heh. Thankfully that wasn't one of the emails that needed to be edited for tone before I sent it, or at least I hope not. Anyway, to finish the thought, the only reason I can think of why we might not want to publicly discuss release timing is to the extent that it is in reaction to security vulnerabilities. Anyway, I'm still curious about what'n'all -core actually does. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: Previous emails from Tom seem to indicate that the mandate of -core is mostly to decide things like the timing of releases. If we gave that job to somebody else, would there be anything left for -core to do? If so, what? And on the flip side, it is precisely because of the lack of a clear statement on release timing from -core that we're having these discussions here on -hackers. The core team sees its scheduling powers as more like this: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01803.php not as determining now what the 8.5 schedule will be. And yeah, the reason it's a private list has to do with security and similar problems, not with discussions of long-term project scheduling. The latter *should* happen on hackers, which is exactly where we're having it. I think if the -hackers community got deadlocked, core would try to use its authority to break the deadlock, but I see no indication that that's needed here. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Robert Haasrobertmh...@gmail.com wrote: Previous emails from Tom seem to indicate that the mandate of -core is mostly to decide things like the timing of releases. That's not all we do. If we gave that job to somebody else, would there be anything left for -core to do? If so, what? And on the flip side, it is precisely because of the lack of a clear statement on release timing from -core that we're having these discussions here on -hackers. Personally, I think that's better, since -core is a private list (why?) to which most of us don't have access, and I don't see any reason why decisions like this can't be made in public. We try to do everything within the community whenever possible, which is precisely why this discussion is happening here. Other matters we deal with usually demand confidentiality which is why -core is a closed list. That may include dealing with private companies, or dealing with complaints or privacy issues raised by people who do not wish to do so in public. Obviously I cannot go into details, but some things just can't be handled on an open list. We also very occasionally step in and make a decision if -hackers (or another group) is deadlocked over an issue. For example, the whole 'change the name' debate. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes: Anyway, I'm still curious about what'n'all -core actually does. Not a lot. That's a feature, not a bug. Most project management discussion happens on -hackers. If -hackers can't come to a decision then core will try to resolve the deadlock (assuming we can agree ;-)) but we are well aware that we have a finite supply of authority, and we try not to expend it unnecessarily. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
Robert, Heikki, http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs. So by my count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in that direction - so I guess that settles the matter? I think there's a fairly clear consensus in favor of 4-CF. The reason you've not heard from anyone else on the topic is that nobody is objecting. So, at this point, we should go with it and someone (me, Dave, Tom) should post a schedule somewhere. That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. Having recently been immersed in the issues of the Perl 5 community, I'm going to disagree and say that having a singular release manager would be a bad idea. While an autocrat is a more rapid decision-maker, he or she can also be a bottleneck ... and frequently is. I do think that we (core) should show more leadership in enforcing the deadlines that the hackers have already agreed on. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc. www.pgexperts.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 5:55 PM, Josh Berkusj...@agliodbs.com wrote: Robert, Heikki, http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs. So by my count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in that direction - so I guess that settles the matter? I think there's a fairly clear consensus in favor of 4-CF. The reason you've not heard from anyone else on the topic is that nobody is objecting. So, at this point, we should go with it and someone (me, Dave, Tom) should post a schedule somewhere. I suggest -hackers for starters, on a new thread. That implies that we need a release manager. Electing one would be the first step. That's a lot of work and responsibility, with lots of potential for making people cross, so in practice I think as soon as someone steps up to the plate and volunteers to do it, he's the one. Having recently been immersed in the issues of the Perl 5 community, I'm going to disagree and say that having a singular release manager would be a bad idea. While an autocrat is a more rapid decision-maker, he or she can also be a bottleneck ... and frequently is. I do think that we (core) should show more leadership in enforcing the deadlines that the hackers have already agreed on. I was going to say that I'm perfectly fine with having an all-powerful release manager, as long as it's me. I don't really think we need to invest that much authority in one person, however - and certainly not without more of a clearly-defined mandate for exactly what that person is supposed to do with that authority. What I really think we need is, as you say, more leadership in enforcing the agreed-upon deadlines, and along with that, more leadership in setting the deadlines (and other parameters) in the first place. However, I'm not sure that that group should be coterminous with core. For example, this is something that I'm pretty interested in helping with, and I am obviously not a core team member. However, I'm not asking for an exception just for me: I think that generally it's in the best interest of the project to recruit MORE people to help with this work, and if we say that it is the responsibility of core, then we're confining it to a group of seven people of whom only five are regularly active on -hackers. And several of those people are committers who I would guess are somewhat overworked already. I do think it would be good to have a list of who the people are who are volunteering to help with commitfest and release management. ISTM that well-organized list of such people would help a lot with coordination and divvying up of responsibilities: who might be available to help with X, who is already working on Y, etc. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
On ons, 2009-09-02 at 12:52 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Isn't core supposed to be the release manager? The core team has historically been the release *maker* and has some done management of the final phases of that process. But I think the sentiment is growing that we need more management throughout the entire release cycle. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
[HACKERS] community decision-making 8.5
I posted a message a little over a week ago discussing the timetable for 8.5: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01576.php That thread went off on a number of interesting tangents which I found pretty informative. Probably the most interesting one to me personally was about a need for more efficient decision-making. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg02149.php It's interesting to note that the original purpose of this thread was to get a decision about the timetable for 8.5 development, and that of the original responses to that message only one person (Peter) expression a clear opinion about the topic in question. Everyone else, so far as I can see, said some variant of on the one hand... but then on the other hand Eventually, Josh Berkus retracted his original endorsement for the 3-CF plan and suggested that we go with four. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs. So by my count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in that direction - so I guess that settles the matter? I think this is a good illustration of the problems with decision-making in a community environment - given choices 3 and 4 most of the votes were somewhere between 3.25 and 3.75. I think, in general, that when people weigh in with clear opinions, we're pretty good about moving in the direction that most people want to go. Even two votes can be enough for a consensus, if they both go in the same direction. However, when the responses aren't clearly in favor of one option or the other, or when no-one writes back at all, I think we tend to flounder. It's worth thinking about how we could improve this. I think the ideas that were floated on the previous thread of having a beta-mom and/or an open-items-fest are good ones, and we might want to have both: someone to work with beta testers, and someone to coordinate volunteers to propose solutions to the open items. Those proposals are specific to getting a release out the door, though, and that may not be the only context in which this problem comes up. Still, it's a start - any other ideas? ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
