On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:42 PM, FarjadFarid(ChkNet)
<farjad.farid@checknetworks.com> wrote:
Five days (and I don't know how many posts) ago, there was this:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160106184818.GT21041@crankycanuck.ca
Which said in part:
> The other thing I note is that the IETF got
> most of these documents because someone thought the problem was
> important enough to write a draft proposal first. As I said in a
> recent IETF plenary, the organization works partly because at the IETF
> you don't need anyone's permission to try something; you don't even
> need forgiveness. The worst that can happen is that people reject the
> proposal. It always seemed to me that the Postgres project worked in
> a similar way, so I'd encourage those who think there is a problem to
> be solved to make a scratch proposal and see whether it flies. It's
> always easier to discuss a concrete proposal than to try to figure out
> whether something is a good idea in the abstract.
I'm going to give this a belated +1, and ignore any further posts on
this thread.
If someone wants to take the step of posting a concrete proposal,
please start a new thread with a different subject line.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
