Re: pgsql-patches considered harmful - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: pgsql-patches considered harmful
Date
Msg-id 44B3B0AF.9030404@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pgsql-patches considered harmful  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: pgsql-patches considered harmful  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Re: pgsql-patches considered harmful  (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>> If this is chosen as the preferred path, we could get the list bot to
>> add "Reply-To: pghackers" in pgsql-patches postings to help push
>> discussions there.  I'd vote for doing the same in pgsql-committers,
>> which also gets its share of non-null discussion content.
>
> that is a very easy and quick change ... but wasn't doing that brought 
> up before and alot of ppl were against that?
>
> If nobody objects within, say, the next 24 hours ... ?  I'll enabled 
> that one both ...
>

Don't be surprised if there are objections - this is one of those things 
like emacs vs vi that stirs up religious debate.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Max size of a btree index entry
Next
From: Satoshi Nagayasu
Date:
Subject: Re: Three weeks left until feature freeze