Re: 9.5 CF1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Magnus Hagander
Subject Re: 9.5 CF1
Date
Msg-id CABUevExnQu5xgObAYg777vyWnN+AAdfEHoYVcOBHqPapsX6_Gw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.5 CF1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 2:36 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> P.S. If you tag your reviews with [REVIEW] in the Subject, it'll be
>>> easier to keep track of them.

>> I and, I believe, various other people hate that style, because at
>> least in Gmail, it breaks the threading.  It is much easier to find
>> things if they are all posted on one thread.

> Yes, please don't do that.  A simple, normal reply to the message that
> submits the patch is much better from my point of view as a subsequent
> reviewer and committer.

Worth noting also is that Magnus is working on a new version of the
commitfest app that will be able to automatically keep track of threads
about patches --- so long as they *are* threads according to our mailing
list archives.  I'm not sure if the archives recognize replies with a
changed Subject: as being the same thread or not.

The archives code does threading based on the headers (in-reply-to and references, in priority order). It completely ignores the subject when it comes to the threading.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Dunstan
Date:
Subject: buildfarm client release 4.13
Next
From: Christoph Berg
Date:
Subject: Is analyze_new_cluster.sh still useful?