Message-ID: <4821D0A0.8040305@zeut.net>
Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 11:54:08 -0400
From: "Matthew T. O'connor" <matthew@zeut.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com>
CC: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Brendan Jurd <direvus@gmail.com>,
	Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists
References: <34d269d40805070752g4d578a1fu6acb00fd8e5f774e@mail.gmail.com>	
	<200805071503.m47F3xi10638@momjian.us>
	<34d269d40805070837q19f1144eu8c316fa1cf6d8780@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <34d269d40805070837q19f1144eu8c316fa1cf6d8780@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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

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?  
By the way, what is the actual size limit on hackers vs patches.  I 
would imagine that most patches would already fit in the current hackers 
limit, especially since you can gzip.