From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: community decision-making & 8.5 |
Date: | 2009-09-02 21:09:02 |
Message-ID: | 29222.1251925742@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)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
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2009-09-02 21:14:39 | Re: community decision-making & 8.5 |
Previous Message | Grzegorz Jaskiewicz | 2009-09-02 20:46:30 | Re: clang's static checker report. |