Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Matthew T. O'connor
Subject Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists
Date
Msg-id 4821D0A0.8040305@zeut.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists  ("Alex Hunsaker" <badalex@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists  ("Brendan Jurd" <direvus@gmail.com>)
Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Removal of the patches email list  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> A big part of my problem with the split is if there is a discussion
> taking place on -hackers I want to be able to reply to the discussion
> and say "well, here is what I was thinking".  Sending it to -patches
> first waiting for it to hit the archive so I can link to it in my
> reply on -hackers seems pointless and convoluted.
>
> But if thats what you want, thats what ill try to do from now on :)
>
> For instance the patch Tom reviewed of mine yesterday only -hackers
> was copied, so I maintained that but also added -patches because I was
> sending in a patch...
>
> I think It will be an ongoing problem though especially for new people
> as they probably wont understand the "logical" split...

Patches are an integral part of the conversation about development, I 
think trying to split them up is awkward at best.  Do people really 
still think that the potential for larger messages is really a problem?  
By the way, what is the actual size limit on hackers vs patches.  I 
would imagine that most patches would already fit in the current hackers 
limit, especially since you can gzip.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists
Next
From: Marc Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [0/4] Proposal of SE-PostgreSQL patches