Tom Lane wrote:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > This is what bothers me about having such an informal TODO list. There is a
> > danger that people will work in items only to have them shot down, which is
> > 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 stage.
>
> 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.
Well, the item was added at the request of Peter Eisentraut and Martijn
van Oosterhout and took place on hackers. The TODO addition was posted
too:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-12/msg00333.php
Not sure what else can be done to improve this process. I will remove
the TODO item.
And our developer TODO has:
<H3 id="item1.4">1.4) What do I do after choosing an item to
work on?</H3>
<P>Send an email to pgsql-hackers with a proposal for what you want
to do (assuming your contribution is not trivial). Working in
isolation is not advisable because others might be working on the asame
TODO item, or you might have misunderstood the TODO item. In the
email, discuss both the internal implementation method you plan to
use, and any user-visible changes (new syntax, etc). For complex
patches, it is important to get community feeback on your proposal
before starting work. Failure to do so might mean your patch is
rejected.</P>
So I think we are covered there too.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
