On Jan 24, 2016, at 5:15 PM, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Based on our structure it doesn't work that way. At a minimum we will come up with a CoC and it will be passed to -core for final approval. -core will then also define how they want implement it (or even turn us down). We are just doing some of the hard work for them so that they see what the community and majority of contributors come up with. I think that it is the understatement of the year (to date) to say that consensus is not emerging here. Worse yet, it is causing huge rifts in the community while not resulting in an agreed-to product. I am pro-CoC, but without a documented enforcement and resolution mechanism, we might as well just add "be excellent to each other" on postgresql.org and be done with it. I'd suggest that -core take over from this point, and decide on a full package, rather than continuing this process here in -general. -- -- Christophe Pettus xof@xxxxxxxxxxxx -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
