community decision-making & 8.5 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

I posted a message a little over a week ago discussing the timetable for 8.5:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01576.php

That thread went off on a number of interesting tangents which I found
pretty informative.  Probably the most interesting one to me
personally was about a need for more efficient decision-making.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg02149.php

It's interesting to note that the original purpose of this thread was
to get a decision about the timetable for 8.5 development, and that of
the original responses to that message only one person (Peter)
expression a clear opinion about the topic in question.  Everyone
else, so far as I can see, said some variant of "on the one hand...
but then on the other hand...".  Eventually, Josh Berkus retracted his
original endorsement for the 3-CF plan and suggested that we go with
four.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01651.php
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-08/msg01983.php

Josh's schedule was subsequently endorsed by Simon Riggs.  So by my
count we now have four votes for a 4-CF schedule and one for a 3-CF
schedule (me), maybe two if you count Tom, who I think was leaning in
that direction - so I guess that settles the matter?

I think this is a good illustration of the problems with
decision-making in a community environment - given choices "3" and "4"
most of the votes were somewhere between "3.25" and "3.75".  I think,
in general, that when people weigh in with clear opinions, we're
pretty good about moving in the direction that most people want to go.Even two votes can be enough for a consensus, if
theyboth go in the
 
same direction.  However, when the responses aren't clearly in favor
of one option or the other, or when no-one writes back at all, I think
we tend to flounder.

It's worth thinking about how we could improve this.  I think the
ideas that were floated on the previous thread of having a beta-mom
and/or an open-items-fest are good ones, and we might want to have
both: someone to work with beta testers, and someone to coordinate
volunteers to propose solutions to the open items.  Those proposals
are specific to getting a release out the door, though, and that may
not be the only context in which this problem comes up.  Still, it's a
start - any other ideas?

...Robert