On 01/24/2016 05:20 PM, Christophe Pettus wrote:
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,
You are wrong and the fact that we have gone from a motion style, to a
story style, to a continually and incrementally improving draft proves
it. This is the largest feature the community has tried to design and
implement. It is going to take a little time.
I don't see anyone rushing to commit or roll back other features.
it is causing huge rifts in the community while not resulting in an agreed-to product.
This shouldn't cause any rifts. The community evolves. 10 years ago
nobody would even think of having a CoC. Did the community change? No,
the new people coming in had different requirements. Those people want a
CoC, they feel better when it is there.
If you don't want to constructively participate in the development of
this feature, nobody is asking you to. We are all volunteers. You are
welcome to not read another email on this thread and just wait for
whatever -core inevitably decides.
If -Core would like to step up and take this over now, by all means.
However, I think they are hoping that we are all adult enough to figure
this mess out ourselves so they can commit it.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
