On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 1:21 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> Deciding "WHAT goes in the next release?" is what Committers do, by
> definition.
>
> It seems strange to have a different mailing list for "WHEN is the next
> release needed?", so those two things should be combined.
Core team members have so
+1
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> > purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> > avoidable problems. Theref
On 12 June 2015 at 06:48, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 03:47:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/core/
>
> > After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> > that nobody has mentioned:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 03:47:06PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/core/
> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
> that's compl
On 06/11/2015 05:08 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>> JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
>>> core position.
>>>
>>
>> I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very good
>> argument t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
>> core position.
>>
>
> I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very good
> argument that FOR such a position in core.
+1.
--
Peter Geoghe
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> I think #1 is the part that we seem to have the most trouble with. It
> seems easily fixable: establish a new mailing list for that task (say
> pgsql-release) and get all the current -core in there, plus the set of
> active committers. Tha
Robert Haas wrote:
> The release process has multiple parts:
>
> 1. Deciding that we need to do a release, either because $BUG is
> really bad or because we have security fixes to release or because
> enough time has gone by.
> 2. Updating translations and time zones and release notes and stampin
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 06/11/2015 11:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
>> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
>> that's completely unlike the others. These are re
On 06/11/2015 11:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> After going over this a few times, there is one thing that strikes me
> that nobody has mentioned: the list of tasks mentioned there has one
> that's completely unlike the others. These are related to human
> relations:
>
> Acting as a conduit f
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> avoidable problems. Therefore, the core team has written a core charter
> and published it on our website:
>
> http:
On 06/11/2015 10:20 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
True but that isn't the fault of core outside of communication. The hackers,
reviewers and committers of those patches should be required to communicate
with core in a way that expresses the true severity of a situation so core
can make a:
Management
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
>> However, the core team needs to know when it should initiate a
>> release, and to do that it needs to understand the impact of bugs that
>> have been fixed and bugs that have not been fixed. The recent
>> discussion of multixacts seems
On 06/11/2015 10:10 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
Magnus: Committer, primary Windows dude and reviews patches here and
there.
Not sure that's a fair title at this point. Both Andrew and Michael seem
to be doing more of that than me these days, for example. (I do review
patches here and t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
>
> On 06/11/2015 07:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>>
>> Hopefully this will be helpful to people.
>>>
>>
>> I believe the core team is suffering from a lack of members who are
>> involved in writing, reviewing, and committing patches. Those
On 06/11/2015 09:49 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 06/11/2015 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
core position.
I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very
good argument that FOR such a positi
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> This is crap. I am on the packagers list. Core always asks what people think
> and no it is not always accepted. There have been many times that the
> release has been pushed off because of resources available or new
> information being p
On 06/11/2015 12:29 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
JoshB: Advocacy. There is a strong argument that does not need to be a
core position.
I strongly disagree with this. On the contrary, I think there is a very
good argument that FOR such a position in core.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgs
On 06/11/2015 07:12 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Hopefully this will be helpful to people.
I believe the core team is suffering from a lack of members who are
involved in writing, reviewing, and committing patches. Those things
are not core functions of the core team, as that charter illustrates.
On 06/11/2015 08:26 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
Timing *decisions* are not made by -core, as I've told you in the
past. They are made by the packagers who do the actual work, based on
suggestions from -core.
You have told me that in the past, and I do not accept that it is true.
The suggestions f
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>> Timing *decisions* are not made by -core, as I've told you in the
>> past. They are made by the packagers who do the actual work, based on
>> suggestions from -core.
>
> You have told me that in the past, and I do not accept that it is true.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Dave Page wrote:
> Yes, and we have recently been discussing how best to solicit those
> opinions this year.
Great!
>> As a non-core team member, I find it quite frustrating that getting a
>> release triggered requires emailing a closed mailing list.
>
> It does
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
>> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
>> avoidable problems. Therefore, the
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
> purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
> avoidable problems. Therefore, the core team has written a core charter
> and published it o
There has been some confusion by old and new community members about the
purpose of the core team, and this lack of understanding has caused some
avoidable problems. Therefore, the core team has written a core charter
and published it on our website:
http://www.postgresql.org/developer/co
25 matches
Mail list logo
