On 12/10/05, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> > This is what bothers me about having such an informal TODO list. There is
> > danger that people will work in items only to have them shot down, which
> > a great way to turn off developers. And there is also a danger that other
> > people will think that the todo item is likely to be accepted at some
> I've complained to Bruce about that before --- there are a number of items
> on TODO that only one person thinks is a good idea.
> Perhaps some sort of [controversial] marker would be useful to warn
> people that the item needs more discussion before going off in a corner
> and trying to implement it.
> regards, tom lane
Actually some items are marked with a '?' that shows that that item
needs discussion... although that it's not clearly stated in no where
in the TODO...
Maybe be explicit about what the '?' mark means and mark every new
item with it until there is concensus a on it
(DBA: DataBase Aniquilator ;)
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-12-11 02:16:18|
|Subject: Re: running script on server shutdown (TODO)|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2005-12-11 00:11:48|
|Subject: Re: running script on server shutdown (TODO) |