SEO
vBulletin Search Engine Optimization
| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| ||||
| ||||
 Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: > "Matthew T. O'connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes: >> 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? > > Personally I'd be fine with abandoning -patches and just using -hackers. > We could try it for awhile, anyway, and go back if it seems worse. I'm for that. >> By the way, what is the actual size limit on hackers vs patches. > > They do have different size limits; we'd have to raise the limit on > -hackers if we do this. Marc would know exactly what the limits are. Note that even the size limit on -patches is too small for some patches. What I did with previous large patches which were not getting through to patches was put them up on a web page but with a new filename for each version. So the URL for a given version *was* stable, the content never changed. You could check the index page to see if there were more recent versions. I would suggest putting large patches up on the wiki in cases like that now, but isn't there a size limit on the wiki too? -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers      |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists David Fetter wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 12:20:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > "Matthew T. O'connor" <matthew@zeut.net> writes: > > > 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? > > > > Personally I'd be fine with abandoning -patches and just using > > -hackers. We could try it for awhile, anyway, and go back if it > > seems worse. > > This would make it a little tougher on me as far as maintaining the > patches section of the PostgreSQL Weekly News, but I'll deal with it > if I need to  Yes, it is going to make scooping patches from the mailing list harder, but the existing split seems to be causing more widespread problems that are harder to ajust. -- 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 |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > David Fetter wrote: > > This would make it a little tougher on me as far as maintaining the > > patches section of the PostgreSQL Weekly News, but I'll deal with it > > if I need to > > Yes, it is going to make scooping patches from the mailing list harder, > but the existing split seems to be causing more widespread problems that > are harder to ajust. > Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki maybe this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly standard [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for patches... -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists Alex Hunsaker wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > David Fetter wrote: > > > This would make it a little tougher on me as far as maintaining the > > > patches section of the PostgreSQL Weekly News, but I'll deal with it > > > if I need to > > > > Yes, it is going to make scooping patches from the mailing list harder, > > but the existing split seems to be causing more widespread problems that > > are harder to ajust. > > > > Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki maybe > this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly standard > [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for patches... Anything with a file attachment or "^diff" line is probably a diff and we could flag the subject line. -- 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 |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex@gmail.com> writes: > Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki maybe > this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly standard > [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for patches... Hm, I wonder how hard it would be to make a perl script which automatically uploads any attachments sent to -hackers to the wiki. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists Gregory Stark wrote: > "Alex Hunsaker" <badalex@gmail.com> writes: > > > Sure but if patch submitters are also sticking them in the wiki > > maybe this is a non issue? We could also adopt the seemingly > > standard [PATCH] subject tag so you can filter easily for > > patches... > > Hm, I wonder how hard it would be to make a perl script which > automatically uploads any attachments sent to -hackers to the wiki. Not all that hard, but I'm also pretty sure that's not something we want. To make it any kind of useful we'd need something with a lot more intelligence than just picking up all attachments. //Magnus -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists Matt, > 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? * Well, I for one would need to change my subscription address. This e-mailbox has a limit of 60MB. I have 5 e-mail accounts, though, so I could figure something out. In this day and age of Google/Yahoo/MSN unlimited accounts, list volume isn't quite the problem it once was. How about hacking together a simple patch tracker instead, as Bruce suggested? I've never found e-mail to be a particularly good way to track patches. -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL @ Sun San Francisco -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > How about hacking together a simple patch tracker instead, as Bruce suggested? > I've never found e-mail to be a particularly good way to track patches. The thing is that we don't just want to "track" patches. We want to talk about patches. In my ideal world we would mail off our patches to -hackers and the mail software (this could be a subscription option) would strip them out before forwarding the message. It would upload them to a web server and put a link in the forwarded messages to the file on the web server. If you have a clever IMAP server and a clever IMAP client you're actually not far from that world today. But a lot of us are stuck with at least one unclever piece of software there. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| |||
| |||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists Gregory Stark napsal(a): > "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > >> How about hacking together a simple patch tracker instead, as Bruce suggested? >> I've never found e-mail to be a particularly good way to track patches. > > The thing is that we don't just want to "track" patches. We want to talk about > patches. I think we want to have both. If you have big patch you don't want go through all patch again and again when new version is released with only few changes. If you are able to have diff between two patch versions you are able preform easy check if all comments are already fixed. Zdenek -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
|
05-10-2008, 02:05 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists "Zdenek Kotala" <Zdenek.Kotala@Sun.COM> writes: > Gregory Stark napsal(a): >> "Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >> >>> How about hacking together a simple patch tracker instead, as Bruce >>> suggested? I've never found e-mail to be a particularly good way to track >>> patches. >> >> The thing is that we don't just want to "track" patches. We want to talk about >> patches. > > I think we want to have both. If you have big patch you don't want go through > all patch again and again when new version is released with only few changes. > If you are able to have diff between two patch versions you are able preform > easy check if all comments are already fixed. Ah, that's not something a patch tracker or a mailing list would solve. There is a tool that would solve this -- a revision control system. We aren't using CVS the way it's really intended. If all this development happened on branches then people could go look at the current version at any point, not just when authors decide to announce it. And people could generate diffs between the last time they looked at that branch and now etc. Now the problem is that CVS sucks and creating branches is a heavyweight operation which imposes a burden forever more. Also there is no access control system so you cannot grant commit access to just one branch. There are newer revision control systems where anyone can create a branch at any time and keep it on their local machine. They fit our development model much better than CVS when you include the development happening outside the committers and the main tree. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostGIS support! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |
Linear Mode
