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.

Yea, that is a problem. Adding a new patch to patches while discussing
on hackers is a receipe for confusion.

> 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...

Yea, sending to both is probably the worst. I would just post to hackers
and mention you sent a new version of the patch to patches --- they
usually show up the same time.

> I think It will be an ongoing problem though especially for new people
> as they probably wont understand the "logical" split...

Yep, I can hardly explain it.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers