Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting
Date
Msg-id 17758.1155835474@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Then why bother with two different lists?
>> 
>> If developers need to be on both list (which I beleive they do), and the
>> focus of both lists is developers, then why not just remove one of them
>> and get rid of the problem?

> I wouldn't argue with that. It would be at least equally good from my 
> perspective, and maybe slightly better.

One big difference between the two lists is the maximum-message-size
policy ;-).  To unify them we would need to relax the size limit on
-hackers, and I'm not convinced that's a good idea.  It would likely
drive away at least some people who currently provide valuable ideas
even though they don't care to receive -patches.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql-patches reply-to (was Re: [PATCHES] selecting
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Autovacuum on by default?