On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:27:13PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> When I came up with the idea of CommitFests they were supposed to be an
>> incremental improvement for us to build on. Instead it's remained
>> frozen in amber, and steadily becoming less and less effective. I've
>> suggested a number of improvements and changes over the years, and
>> largely been rewarded with denial, attacks, ridicule, and general
>> sandbaggery. I'm done. If the community doesn't think there's a
>> problem, then clearly I'm in error for proposing fixes.
>>
>> Not sure who you're going to get to do CF3, though. I'm not going to be
>> CFM again, and I'm pretty sure nobody else wants the job either.
>
> For what it's worth, I liked how you ran CF 2013-06. It proceeded better than
> any CF of the 9.3 development cycle. I can appreciate that it drained you,
> though; you tried new things, and your reward was lots of flak. Your
> innovations were 85% good; sadly, debate raged over the negative aspects only.
> Perhaps that arises from how we deal with code. An 85%-good patch can still
> wreak havoc in the field; closing that gap is essential. We say little about
> the correct aspects of a patch; it's usually a given that things not mentioned
> are satisfactory and have self-evident value. That's not such an effective
> discussion pattern when the topic is management strategies.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
