Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3891A2E002E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:58:52 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 47927-05 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:58:51 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BA4D2E002C for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:58:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from dynamic.hagander.net ([127.0.0.1]) (encrypted and authenticated) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 760F9DCC945; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:58:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mha-laptop (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mha-laptop.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB1FFF09C; Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:00:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:00:00 +0200 From: Magnus Hagander To: "Joshua D. Drake" Cc: Robert Treat , pgsql-www@postgresql.org, "Greg Sabino Mullane" Subject: Re: Another summerofcode.html update Message-ID: <20080331140000.21348326@mha-laptop> In-Reply-To: <20080331044918.13a83261@jd-laptop> References: <200803252132.51463.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> <160a93a3fa789a18fd38d53c16b0fd95@biglumber.com> <20080325185356.130abd09@jd-laptop> <200803262307.17165.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> <20080327101555.790f29c6@mha-laptop> <20080331044918.13a83261@jd-laptop> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200803/629 X-Sequence-Number: 14748 Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:15:55 +0100 > Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > I agree with Robert here - having a quick "applied, thanks" note > > appear in the proper thread makes it a *lot* easier to figure out > > which things can be removed from the local shame-list of stuff that > > needs to be applied. > > With the infrequency of commits for www should we just point the > commit message to -www? I think not. It' just yet another reason that people would stay away who're more interested in the other parts of the www discussion, and it also does not solve the actual problem with the threading of the message... //Magnus