On 01/12/2016 07:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
On 01/12/2016 02:43 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
To me, this reads more like the document itself. I hope I have
done justice to Josh's points as well as Tom's, although I would
bet there are a number of people on the list that can improve on my
effort here.
I read your whole document. It is not badly written and I would agree it
does read a bit more like a lot of the CoCs out there. My critique would
be that it adds words for the sake of adding words. The more words the
more ambiguity and the more nits to pick.
As we have all appeared to coalesce around v5, I would suggest that we
stick with it or gently modify v5 up to the point that it is something
that sticks.
Um, you may have coalesced around v5, but I'm not sure there's consensus
there. I agree with Kevin that his version looks a lot more like a real
CoC. His is surely still amenable to some editing, but there are also
things in your version that we can do without. Particularly the "not
about being offended" line. That's pretty defensive and unwelcoming,
IMO, and that isn't the image we want to project here.
Even with the V5? There is a pretty good point there IMO. It is very
easy to get offended over really stupid things (including just standard
miscommunication).
That said, I actually don't have a problem taking that point out and
making that V6.
JD
regards, tom lane
--
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/ 503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't
control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
