On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> Review of design concepts and WIP patches has *always* been a problem
> for this project. Andrew Sullivan bitched about it at some length back
> in 2004 ("Why there is no traffic on pgsql-replicationhooks", but
> Andrew's blog is down now unfortunately). And I've gotten complaints
> from numerous people: the Drizzle student, the person who e-mailed me,
> Afilias, Greenplum, Aster Data, others. It's just a broken process, and
> it particularly leads PostgreSQL forks to not contribute back stuff.
>
> We tell people to submit a design concept, but then such submissions are
> often ignored.
Please provide the evidence that this is a problem that exists now, as
opposed to seven years ago. I leave pgsql-hackers emails marked
unread until they have gotten a response, especially if it's something
important like a design proposal. I have 10 unread threads at the
moment; and I don't think any of them are design proposals except
possibly "Still more REINDEX fun", which was posted 9 minutes ago by
Tom - presumably not the case you are concerned about. I have worked
extremely hard to make sure that we do NOT ignore such submissions,
and I would like to hold your feet to the fire on this one a little
bit: let's hear the list of design ideas that have been proposed in
the last year and been ignored. If the process is as bad as you are
alleging, you should find it easy to come up with numerous, recent
examples. I bet you can't.
> When they're not ignored, they often are subject to
> either extreme bikeshedding or a lot of negativity around things the
> author hasn't implemented yet ... even if the author warns that they're
> not implemented.
I concede that this happens, but I don't believe it happens nearly as
often as it used to, and, again, let's have some recent examples. I
don't care what happened three years ago; a lot has changed in the
last three years.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company