On 6/5/15 10:39 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> The other side of that coin is that we might get useful comments from
> testers on how the feature ought to work. I don't agree with the notion
> that all feature details must be graven on stone tablets before we start
> trying to get feedback from people outside the core development community.
+1
> The same point applies to the FDW C API questions, or to RLS, or to the
> "expanded objects" work that I did. (I'd really love it if the PostGIS
> folk would try to use that sometime before it's too late to adjust the
> definition...) Now, you could argue that people likely to have useful
> input on those issues are fully capable of working with git tip, and you'd
> probably be right, but would they do so? As Simon says nearby, publishing
> an alpha/beta/whatever is our signal to the wider community that it's time
> for them to start paying attention. I do not think they will look at 9.5
> until we do that; and I think it'll be our loss if they don't start
> looking at these things soon.
+1, but I also think we should have a better mechanism for soliciting
user input on these things while design discussions are happening. ISTM
that there's a lot of hand-waving that happens around use cases that
could probably be clarified with end user input.
FWIW, I don't think the blocker here is git or building from source. If
someone has that amount of time to invest it's not much different than
grabbing a tarball.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
