Re: Where to load modules from?

On 15 Sep 2013 18:55, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> On 09/15/2013 05:52 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 6:51 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net<mailto:
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 2013-09-14 at 22:15 +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
>> >
>> > This proposal comes with no patch because I think we are able to
>> > understand it without that, so that it would only be a waste of
>> > everybody's time to attach code for a random solution on the
>> list here
>> > to that email.
>>
>> It shouldn't be in the commit fest if it has no patch.
>>
>>
>> I thought the general recommendation was the opposite, that planning and
road maps should be submitted for review before non-trivial coding is
started; and that despite the name the commitfest is the best way that this
is done. Of course now I can't find the hackers thread where this
recommendation was made...
>>
>>
>
> It is unquestionably correct that roadmaps and planning should be made
available for review and discussion. But the assertion that this should be
done via the commitfest is not. The commitfest app has never been for
anything other than code, that I am aware of, and I am quite sure you will
find fierce resistance to any notion that design discussions should take
place anywhere but on this mailing list.

Well the code reviews should also go via the list so that's neither here
nor there.

One of the original problems the commitfest was aiming to solve was Tay
people would had be a project, make some tentative progress, ask if they're
on the right track or how to tackle some problem, hear nothing until
feature freeze at which point the original author had moved on and dropped
the project.

In other words, "forcing the issue" is one of the original design goals of
commitfests.