Re: JDBC 4 Compliance

Bryan Varner wrote
>> Since "transition" is necessary so are the politics.
>
> Bull.
>
> What's bothering me is not politics. What's bothering me is the giant
> vacuum of direction. There is no long-term goal. There's no plan to EOL
> or sunset support for specific combinations of systems. There's no
> structure or path for incorporating new ideas, new talent, or new
> features into the project.
>
> The defacto leader right now is Dave, and his calls for action have come
> up empty handed so far. There's been calls to create a managing 'board'
> (for lack of better words) to manage the political process, and so far,
> no one has actually *done* anything. It's the lack of action, on all
> accounts, which is truly bothering me.

My general thoughts stand; I'll leave it to individuals to decide to what
extent my thoughts may apply to them.  I do not know any persons or projects
well enough to point fingers; my thoughts are much more theoretical in
nature.

Also, I would classify being bothered by a lack of direction to be bothered
by something political.  Maybe its semantics but that is where I am coming
from.

I have lots of ideas, as I am sure others do, but I am not being pressed
currently and have other aspects of my own house to get in order before I
could follow-through along this front.  I too hope someone can take the ball
and run and move this discussion off of a single e-mail thread and into some
more structured.

David J.






--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/JDBC-4-Compliance-tp5760468p5761492.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - jdbc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.