Re: Commit fest queue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Commit fest queue
Date
Msg-id 20950.1207756773@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Commit fest queue  (Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca>)
Responses Re: Commit fest queue  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> writes:
> 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.

That's the theory.

> 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.

Practice is often different from theory ;-).  I don't mind discussion
about a patch on -patches, as long as it's not getting into major design
decisions --- if it does, then the thread should get moved to -hackers,
though that doesn't always happen.

> If not, would it be possible to some how force reply-to of pg-patches to
> -hackers?

No, we aren't going to do that.  It wouldn't work anyway; you can't
force people to send messages to one list rather than another, and
the mail list software is surely not bright enough to distinguish
"patch" from "not a patch" on its own.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a
Next
From: Shane Ambler
Date:
Subject: Re: psql \du and \dg commands.