Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 06:39:25PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>>> perusing a mailbox again. We have unfortunately been badly underprepared
>>> for this.
>>>
>
>
>> Surely that there is an emerging consensus to that effect means that it's
>> not as unfortunate as it might be? I seem to recall the original
>> announcement suggesting this was an experiment. I wouldn't expect the first
>> couple rounds to go without a hitch; as long as there is procedural
>> improvement the next time, that's a good thing, right?
>>
>
> Yeah, we expected to have glitches. I think we now have a much better
> idea what sort of status-tracking support we need for future fests.
>
>
>
Yes. I'm not meaning to whine, sorry if it comes over like that. It
looks to me like we need a sort of prep phase for a commit-fest, so the
people switching into commit-fest mode when it starts can do so with
little friction.
cheers
andrew
