Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> * Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> [080409 10:40]:
>
> > This doesn't seem particularly hard, just a matter of following the
> > relevant mailing lists (mostly -patches, but various offenders send
> > patches elsewhere) and adding links to the current wiki page.
>
> I've often been confused that discussion seem to seamlessly be on either
> -patches, or -hackers. From the understanding I got on the mailing
> list pages (http://archives.postgresql.org/), it seems like -patches is
> supposed to be only for patches, and -hackers for the general
> discussion, issues, features, etc on anything development related.
>
> But from observation, it seems like -patches and -hackers are different
> lists of the same thing, except that -patches has a much bigger message
> size limit.
>
> Is that the intended operational status?
>
> If not, would it be possible to some how force reply-to of pg-patches to
> -hackers? I know, that blows chunks with the usual mailling-list
> reply-to issues, but it would make -hackers the single place to follow
> discussions, and maybe make -patches a more pointed "list of things to
> track".
>
> Tracking 2 lists really isn't a big deal - I'm guessing most others dump
> both -patches and -hackers into the same mailbox anyways too, but it
> does seem like the 2 lists are a needless split as they currently are
> used.
Yea, the split is kind of odd. I think the idea is that discussion
about patch details happens on 'patches' and more general discussion on
hackers, though it doesn't work that way all the time.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
