On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Joshua Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>> Ultimately, we're herding cats here. I don't think you're going to
>> get
>> the community to suddenly be willing to march in lockstep instead.
>
> If you, Peter, Simon, Robert, Heikki, Magnus, Peter G., Greg, Bruce and Andrew agreed on a calendar-driven, mostly
unambiguousprocess and adhered to that process, then the one or two people who didn't follow along wouldn't matter.
Everyoneelse would follow you. The reason things are chaotic now is that our lead committers do not have consensus
andare even inconsistent from CF to CF individually.
>
> In other words: the problem is only unsolvable because *you* think it's unsolvable. If you decide the problem is
solvable,you already have the means to solve it.
That's a somewhat bizarre list of people. It both includes people who
haven't expressed many concerns about our process one way or the other
and excludes some who have. At any rate, clearly the problem is
exactly that there isn't consensus on this. I would generally say
that Tom, Greg Smith, and I are pretty close together on this issue,
and Peter G., Simon, and Dimitri are pretty close together on this
issue, but with a big gap in between those two groups. I am less
clear on how everyone else feels, but I think that saying that "all we
need" is to get consensus among those people is to define the problem,
not the solution.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
