Re: [Spi-private] SPI resolution 2016.05.05.bg.1: NTPsec as associated project

On 05/06/2016 10:02 AM, Bdale Garbee wrote:
> Martin Michlmayr <tbm(at)cyrius(dot)com> writes:
>
>> I haven't seen any conversation with the board about what they need,
>> what they are looking for, etc.
>>
>> I don't know how I should vote on a resolution without any prior
>> conversation at all.
>>
>> Why hasn't Mark been in contact with the board?
>
> He talked to me. The needs and expectations seemed simple enough that I
> didn't think a lot of conversation would be required, but part of the
> reason for including spi-private and spi-general here was so that
> discussion can occur, so go for it!

The board is not all that responsive as a whole. If someone gets a board
member to talk to them (which has happened here and with myself multiple
times) that should be good enough to at least write a resolution.

Of course it is good to have discourse on the resolution but the idea
that we will discuss everything and THEN right a resolution is why we
have projects waiting since November to be approved.

Sincerely,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.