From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: 8.2 features status |
Date: | 2006-08-09 15:05:48 |
Message-ID: | 200608091505.k79F5mo15086@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > My point was, I was going to work on some todos before feature freeze. I
> > asked about two specific todos. One of them was badly worded and one of
> > them did not represent (except in the smallest of ways) what it actually
> > was.
>
> Well, it's certainly the case that some of the TODO items are vaguely
> defined (because part of the TODO item is to figure out what to do)
> and many of them are too complicated to explain well in one sentence.
> But surely that's a different complaint from what's being discussed
> in this thread?
I have started adding URLs to the TODO items, which helps.
> What this story does do for me is reinforce the notion that it's
> critical for newbie developers to work "in the open", getting feedback
> from the lists at an early stage about what they are doing. If you go
> off in a corner and develop a patch for a TODO item, you risk having it
> rejected because you misunderstood what the TODO item was about.
Right, and the TODO items change over time as the system improves in
other ways.
> Maybe the connection is that while thinking about processes, we need
> to take into account the need to encourage people to get early
> feedback about what they are considering doing.
We say that clearly in the developer's FAQ, but it seems it is not
enough.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-08-09 15:12:39 | Re: 8.2 features status |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-09 14:57:38 | Re: Forcing current WAL file to be archived |