| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 8.2 features status |
| Date: | 2006-08-04 21:52:00 |
| Message-ID: | 44D3C180.4060503@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>> What say?
>> It's a shame to have a person burn cycles on this, but anything would be
>> an improvement over what we've got now. --------
>
> Really?
I lot of this could be automated with a web app. The web app takes the
todo, a hacker signs up. Hacker takes todo. Web app reminds hacker every
6, 8 weeks to post an update or release the todo.
Every 6/8 weeks we get an automated email to pgsql-hackers that states
the current status of the todo list.
Joshua D. Drake
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-04 21:54:35 | Re: "Constraint exclusion" is not general enough |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-04 21:43:38 | Re: PGStatement#setPrepareThreshold |