Thread: pgsql-committers shouldn't be the default "developers" list
Recently I've noticed an increasing number of clueless-newbie posts on pgsql-committers, eg http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-01/msg00132.php You can debate which list such posts might be appropriate for, but there is utterly no doubt that -committers ain't it. It just occurred to me what the probable explanation for this is: since the archives.postgresql.org left-side menu got rearranged, pgsql-committers is the list that comes up when you hit "Developers lists". And unlike, say, the front page for pgsql-hackers, there is no verbiage whatsoever in the list description that might suggest to newbies that this is not the place for their question. At minimum the list description needs to be filled in, in a way that will discourage people from posting questions there. Perhaps This list carries CVS commit log messages, and occasionally followup discussions arising from them. If you have a question that is not directly related to a recent commit, it doesn't belong here. But I'd like to suggest also that slavish adherence to alphabetical order in the list menus might not be the best thing. Certainly I'd find that it usually saves me a click if clicking on "Developers lists" brought up -hackers as the default selection. Similarly, in the "User lists" pgsql-admin doesn't seem like the greatest default (hmm, it seems like that list's signal-to-noise ratio has dropped lately too...). Could we point that one at -general perhaps? regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote: > But I'd like to suggest also that slavish adherence to alphabetical > order in the list menus might not be the best thing. Perhaps selecting a list category should not jump straight to a particular list (what would you expect when selecting Regional lists?) but show an intermediate information page that lists the lists again. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Hi, On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > At minimum the list description needs to be filled in, in a way that > will discourage people from posting questions there. Perhaps > > This list carries CVS commit log messages, and occasionally > followup discussions arising from them. (I was about to write an e-mail about this subject) * We could set a reply-to header for -committers list. I think the best could be -hackers lists. The followups should continue there. * Only the committer people should be able to post to this list (I don't mean regular posts. I mean the automated posts via the commit process). Other posts should be "rejected" automatically, instead of being held for moderator approval. Regards, -- The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.503.667.4564 PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/
> -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane > Sent: 11 January 2006 04:55 > To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org > Subject: [pgsql-www] pgsql-committers shouldn't be the > default "developers" list > > Recently I've noticed an increasing number of clueless-newbie posts on > pgsql-committers, eg > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-01/msg00132.php > You can debate which list such posts might be appropriate for, but > there is utterly no doubt that -committers ain't it. > > It just occurred to me what the probable explanation for this is: > since the archives.postgresql.org left-side menu got rearranged, > pgsql-committers is the list that comes up when you hit "Developers > lists". And unlike, say, the front page for pgsql-hackers, there > is no verbiage whatsoever in the list description that might suggest > to newbies that this is not the place for their question. > > At minimum the list description needs to be filled in, in a way that > will discourage people from posting questions there. Perhaps > > This list carries CVS commit log messages, and occasionally > followup discussions arising from them. > > If you have a question that is not directly related to a > recent commit, it doesn't belong here. Done - will appear next time the indexes regenerate. > But I'd like to suggest also that slavish adherence to alphabetical > order in the list menus might not be the best thing. > Certainly I'd find > that it usually saves me a click if clicking on "Developers lists" > brought up -hackers as the default selection. Similarly, in the "User > lists" pgsql-admin doesn't seem like the greatest default > (hmm, it seems > like that list's signal-to-noise ratio has dropped lately too...). > Could we point that one at -general perhaps? I've changed the default list for Users to -general, Developers to -hackers and Projects to pgadmin-support. In the longterm I think Peter's suggestion of having an intro page for each section is probably best, but that will require code changes that I don't have time for right now. Regards, Dave.
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> Done - will appear next time the indexes regenerate.
Looks great, thanks.
regards, tom lane
As someone else suggested, do we want to set Reply-To on that list as well, to redirect discussions to -hackers? On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes: >> Done - will appear next time the indexes regenerate. > > Looks great, thanks. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to > choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not > match > ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> As someone else suggested, do we want to set Reply-To on that list as
> well, to redirect discussions to -hackers?
I don't think we should try to force that to happen. A fair part of the
followup threads in -committers aren't really very interesting and need
not go to -hackers. Another problem with adding Reply-To is that by
default a copy will *not* go personally to the particular committer,
which is something that you usually do want to happen when commenting
on a commit.
(BTW, have we yet got things fixed so that all the addresses that appear
as "From:" for committers actually work to forward mail to the
respective person? Last I checked it seemed not to work for me or
Bruce, but that was awhile ago.)
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > (BTW, have we yet got things fixed so that all the addresses that appear > as "From:" for committers actually work to forward mail to the > respective person? Last I checked it seemed not to work for me or > Bruce, but that was awhile ago.) You've lost me on this one ... from how I'm reading it above, that sounds like a mail reader issue, but I could definitely be mis-reading ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>> (BTW, have we yet got things fixed so that all the addresses that appear
>> as "From:" for committers actually work to forward mail to the
>> respective person? Last I checked it seemed not to work for me or
>> Bruce, but that was awhile ago.)
> You've lost me on this one ... from how I'm reading it above, that sounds
> like a mail reader issue, but I could definitely be mis-reading ...
What I meant is that, for example, Bruce's commits show up as
From: momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian)
which is not his real email address. Some of these addresses actually
work, ie, forward to that committer, but I don't think they all do.
[ tries it... ] A test mail to tgl@postgresql.org, which is the way
my commits show up, hasn't come back after several minutes...
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes: >> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: >>> (BTW, have we yet got things fixed so that all the addresses that appear >>> as "From:" for committers actually work to forward mail to the >>> respective person? Last I checked it seemed not to work for me or >>> Bruce, but that was awhile ago.) > >> You've lost me on this one ... from how I'm reading it above, that sounds >> like a mail reader issue, but I could definitely be mis-reading ... > > What I meant is that, for example, Bruce's commits show up as > From: momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian) > which is not his real email address. Some of these addresses actually > work, ie, forward to that committer, but I don't think they all do. > [ tries it... ] A test mail to tgl@postgresql.org, which is the way > my commits show up, hasn't come back after several minutes... Nope, it got added to your 1500+ other message sitting in your @postgresql.org mailbox :) Your oldest being Jun 4th, 2003 :) You might want to go in and create a forward on that account .. http://webmail.postgresql.org, login tgl, pass should be teh same as your shell passwd, but if it doesn't work, I can reset that ... go under Mail->Filters and set a Forward onto the account to wherever you wish ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> > As someone else suggested, do we want to set Reply-To on that list as
> > well, to redirect discussions to -hackers?
>
> I don't think we should try to force that to happen. A fair part of the
> followup threads in -committers aren't really very interesting and need
> not go to -hackers. Another problem with adding Reply-To is that by
> default a copy will *not* go personally to the particular committer,
> which is something that you usually do want to happen when commenting
> on a commit.
>
> (BTW, have we yet got things fixed so that all the addresses that appear
> as "From:" for committers actually work to forward mail to the
> respective person? Last I checked it seemed not to work for me or
> Bruce, but that was awhile ago.)
It does work for me now, and probably for you too. :-)
All email to @postgresql.org addresses go into this email system:
http://webmail.postgresql.org/imp/login.php
I used to have a .forward file in my shell home directory so all email
went to my pgman@candle.pha.pa.us address, but when I started getting a
lot of spam from momjian@postgresql.org, I removed the .forward file, so
I was unsure where my email was going. When Josh Berkus wanted to use
the momjian@postgreql.org address for press contacts, I had to get it
working again. I logged into that web account and had +99% spams.
Since Marc has added procmail spam tags, I have now re-added my .forward
file, and use the procmail tags Marc adds to help my system learn about
spam before discarding the email.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> Nope, it got added to your 1500+ other message sitting in your
> @postgresql.org mailbox :) Your oldest being Jun 4th, 2003 :)
Cleaned out ... egad, what a lot of spam :-(
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes: >> Nope, it got added to your 1500+ other message sitting in your >> @postgresql.org mailbox :) Your oldest being Jun 4th, 2003 :) > > Cleaned out ... egad, what a lot of spam :-( Almost 3 years worth ... not bad, actually ... 500 per year, less then 2 per day ... :) ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Cleaned out ... egad, what a lot of spam :-(
> Almost 3 years worth ... not bad, actually ... 500 per year, less then 2
> per day ... :)
Yeah ... the truly depressing thought is what an un-filtered mailbox
must look like these days :-(
I'm about ready to engage in vigilante action against spammers, myself.
regards, tom lane
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes: >> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Cleaned out ... egad, what a lot of spam :-( > >> Almost 3 years worth ... not bad, actually ... 500 per year, less then 2 >> per day ... :) > > Yeah ... the truly depressing thought is what an un-filtered mailbox > must look like these days :-( > > I'm about ready to engage in vigilante action against spammers, myself. Do tell? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 11:50:03PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org> writes: > > On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Cleaned out ... egad, what a lot of spam :-( > > > Almost 3 years worth ... not bad, actually ... 500 per year, less then 2 > > per day ... :) > > Yeah ... the truly depressing thought is what an un-filtered mailbox > must look like these days :-( For Nov. '05, 6645 emails scored at 5 or higher in SpamAssassin, out of 20944 total. That compares with about 2800 emails to -hackers and -general. For Dec. '05, 6723 spams out of 20186 (~2500 -hackers and -general). That's relying soley on SpamAssassin to flag spams, btw. Luckily on only gat about 10 spams a day leaking through, although I do send anything scoring >= 3 and < 5 to a 'probabably spam' folder, which helps quite a bit (I don't really consider those as 'leaking through'). > I'm about ready to engage in vigilante action against spammers, myself. Need any help moving bodies? ;) -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461