On 1/23/2016 3:31 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.
I've drafted any number of emails to respond to some point in the CoC
discussion and chosen to NOT sent them... primarily because I don't see
that my opinion needs to be expressed individually - others have
expressed the general gist... and what I would likely say will just
contribute to noise.
I am pretty much attempting to ignore the threads at this point,
skipping through them to find the technical discussions. You are
welcome to respond with a regex that will filter them for us - I haven't
found one that will catch
every thread.
But this is where I will chip in... IMHO (and apparently Adrian's as
well) the CoC discussion became a "sustained disruption" of the
communal space - and I'll add - a long time ago.
+1 to Adrian's suggestion - move it into it's own list. That Adrian is
finding it necessary to leave the -GENERAL list due to the noise... is
Irony with a capital "I" given your stated reasons for the group needing
a CoC.
Roxanne
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
