| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.1 Beta |
| Date: | 2011-03-26 14:42:15 |
| Message-ID: | C9A94E42-05B4-4A7A-858C-6A12DA6D9CA0@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mar 26, 2011, at 4:27 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> The basic point of this post was this: If we wait for the Open Items
> list to drop to zero, many people are unable to contribute and that
> means delay. Also, waiting for the Open Items list to drop to zero
> puts the schedule in the hands of one or two individuals, which is a
> bad thing.
As far as I can tell, everyone is just as free to make suggestions and review patches right as now as they always are. In fact, I do not particularly enjoy slogging through this list of open items. I would be more than happy to have more help. There are plenty of issues there that require real thought, and work, and I have no particular desire to be the one that fixes them all.
You seem to feel that these issues are quite subjective and that the right behavior is altogether unclear. I disagree. There are a few things that may fall into that category, but I think for the most part we're fixing bugs and major usability problems.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-03-26 14:51:57 | Re: 9.1 Beta |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2011-03-26 14:31:14 | Re: 9.1 Beta |