Re: How to Sponsor a Feature - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: How to Sponsor a Feature
Date
Msg-id Pine.GSO.4.64.0806121853220.21949@westnet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: How to Sponsor a Feature  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: How to Sponsor a Feature  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Incidentally, we have minutes from the meeting.  Is it OK to publish
> them openly?

There's a set of minutes already up at 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2008_Developer_Meeting

> There was no solution proposed to the escrow problem, nor to allow 
> sponsoring of one feature by multiple independent individuals.

Pity, as those are the main things I get asked about.  I've been thinking 
about this a fair amount recently, and it is difficult to figure out how 
SPI can handle this in reasonable way.  It almost has to keep a hands-off 
approach, but the centeral organizers here are where people would think 
they should come for advice in this area.

The best approach I've thought of is to have something like 
http://www.postgresql.org/support/professional_support this is instead a 
catalog of companies and/or associated worker bees who have successfully 
had submissions commited.  Then the only interaction SPI/Core would have 
is to confirm that the claims people were making about what patches they 
were involved in were factual, which should be easy enough to verify just 
with the release notes, while disclaiming any interaction in contracting 
with said companies/individuals.  This implements a meritocracy suggesting 
who people might work with by noting what areas they've worked in 
successfully before.

For example, the last time I fielded one of these, the person I was 
advising wanted some PITR work done.  I of course pointed them toward 
2ndquadrant because everything they asked about was in code Simon wrote in 
the first place, and some pointers over to the release notes were 
sufficient to prove that was true.

As for a format, I was thinking the directory would be organized like 
this:

Company  Person A    8.3 <features involved in>    8.2 <features>  Person B    8.2 <features>    ...  Current/future
projects   8.4 add <feature>    Eventually add <feature>
 

Nothing new, really, I'm just suggesting an alternate "view" on the data 
that's available if you know how to look for it, structured in a way that 
would make it easier for potential sponsors to navigate.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Overhauling GUCS
Next
From: Marc Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: b64_encode and decode