"Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu> writes:
>> So, I am really saying that core doesn't do much. You non-core folks
>> aren't missing anything.
> Yeah, that's what you say in public ... There is no cabal!
It's true that very little goes on on the private core mailing list,
and we try to keep it that way. I think that most of the power that
core has (such as it is) is that people on pghackers are willing to
defer to us on decisions like what the release schedule should be.
There are a dozen or more non-core people with CVS write access,
so it's not like core is tightly controlling what happens to the code.
I think ideally our role is one of cat herders, as you put it ---
making the kinds of decisions that a group of dozens or hundreds
can't make effectively. But the long-term direction of the project
is largely determined by what the individual CVS committers choose to
work on. In that sense, a core member has no more power than any
non-core committer. (Case in point: Peter E. has had more influence
on what 7.1 will look like than most of core ;-).)
When you look at it from that point of view, power comes from having
time to work on the code. In that sense, now that Great Bridge is
paying me to work full-time on Postgres, I personally may be the
most dangerous loose cannon on the deck. (Jan is less dangerous
right at the moment only because he's distracted by moving concerns.
Once he's settled again in Norfolk, look out...) Outer joins will be
in 7.1 because *I* decided that would be a good thing to work on ---
this wasn't a core decision, nor one imposed on me by Great Bridge.
I doubt anyone will complain too hard about that particular choice,
but further down the road I might make more debatable choices about
how to spend my time.
I agree 100% with your comments that openness of decision-making
is a critical element in keeping the trust of the community. But
looking at it as just an issue of core vs non-core is missing some part
of the problem. Everyone who contributes code has a responsibility,
proportionate to how much work they're doing, to ensure that the rest
of the community understands and approves of what they're doing.
regards, tom lane