Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E44F2E0070 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 11:28:51 -0300 (ADT) Received: from developer.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 17502-07 for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 11:28:33 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from momjian.us (momjian.us [70.90.9.53]) by developer.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 666632E002D for ; Wed, 7 May 2008 11:28:42 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from bruce@localhost) by momjian.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id m47ESdI04278; Wed, 7 May 2008 10:28:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200805071428.m47ESdI04278@momjian.us> Subject: Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists In-Reply-To: <37ed240d0805070725oa5778b1q9ed77349fdcc24f4@mail.gmail.com> To: Brendan Jurd Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 10:28:39 -0400 (EDT) CC: Tom Lane , PostgreSQL-development X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL124 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200805/166 X-Sequence-Number: 118165 Brendan Jurd wrote: > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where > > > people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a > > > stable URL where they can keep updating the content. I did that with > > > the psql wrap patch and it helped me. > > > > Actually, I find that that is a truly awful habit and I wish that people > > would *not* do it that way. There are two reasons why not: > > > > * no permanent archive of the submitted patch > > > > Yes. I can see how posting a URL to a patch would be convenient, but > having the permanent record of the patch as submitted is important. > > What about uploading patches to the wiki? That way we have the > permanent record (change history), as well as the single authoritative > location for fetching the latest version. Right, I was assuming once the patch was uploaded it would be to our infrastructure and would be permanent. > > * reviewer won't know if the submitter changes the patch after he > > downloads a copy, and in fact nobody will ever know unless the submitter > > takes the time to compare the eventual commit to what he thinks the > > patch is > > > > Well, as long as you send another message to the lists saying "I've > uploaded a new version of the patch, that URL again is <>". If you > just silently update the patch without telling anybody you're bound to > run into problems. Yep. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +