Josh Berkus wrote:
> Andrew,
>
>
>> What happened was that Tom objected to (or at least queried the need
>> for) the patch on the grounds that it was bloat that nobody had asked
>> for. And when I asked I wasn't exactly deluged with requests to commit,
>> so I concluded that it was not generally wanted.
>>
>
> Did you poll on -hackers or on -patches? A *lot* less people read
> -patches.
>
Yeah. true. Although, I must say that I discovered very early on in my
pg-hacking experience that unless you read -patches too you don't really
know what's going on ;-)
> This has been a problem in the past. I'd generally ask that, if a patch
> which was discussed on -hackers gets rejected on -patches, that discussion
> be brought back to -hackers. Often the people who supported the original
> feature are not on -patches and then are unpleasantly surprised when the
> feature they though was accepted doesn't show up in the next version.
>
>
Fair point. Maybe I only posted on -patches.
cheers
andrew
