MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <29222.1341524488@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <28687.1341523141@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CABUevExe8VMTuDrX=WKoQA9T9dztvgjGtikBMCeqdupRb01=QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<29222.1341524488@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 23:44:10 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CABUevEybVA7dEeBUekoinBpLn40jWjhYHdhzPJj=f-p1ZYPRgg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 9.2beta web issues
From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> IIRC we don't normally add this, because we don't want to "assign
>> bugs" to things in beta. Also IIRC, didn't Berkus set up a whole
>> separate list that people are supposed to report beta bugs on?
>
> Geez, I sure hope not, because if there is one I am not subscribed to it
> (AFAIK), and I bet few other hackers are either.  In any case, it's the
> height of folly to imagine that people won't try to use the bug report
> form for beta bugs.

In that case, I definitely suggest we retire it. It's listed on both
http://www.postgresql.org/community/lists/ and in the archives, and is
labeled as the one where to post such reports... I think the idea was
that Josh was going to somehow "filter" the reports before putting
them on -bugs, making sure they were proper, etc. And that the list
would also take *positive* test results, which we definitely don't
want listed as bugs. But I'm definitely +1 for getting rid of the
distinction.


-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/