On 01/23/2016 03:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 01/23/2016 03:08 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
On 01/23/2016 03:03 PM, Berend Tober wrote:
Adrian Klaver wrote:
Motion:
The Coc discussion be moved to its own list where those who care can
argue to their hearts content and leave the rest of us to deal with
technical questions. Upon a decision on said list the result be posted
to the Postgres web site for consideration.
Been suggested already, and rejected:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/56970135.6060203@xxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm an optimist.
With respect Adrian, that is a motion that never stands a chance. If you
don't want to read it, set up a filter that sends it right to the round
file.
Thought long and hard about this and while it is possible, it is not
something I feel I should have to do. This conversation in its many
threads has spun out of control and into areas that a) out of the scope
of this list b) into conduct that would fall a foul of some or all of
the various 'code' that have been proposed. I plead guilty to
contributing to at least some of the previous and that pains me. What
pains me even more is the decision I have reached, to unsubscribe from
--general. Filtered or not this list is not a place for me anymore and
continued participation will only anger me more and that goes places I
do not want to go. I will continue on other postgres-- lists as long as
they stay untainted.
JD
--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
