Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ghX4y-0008Dg-LL for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:56:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ghX4x-0002Rp-3v for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:56:47 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ghX4w-0002Ri-QC for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:56:46 +0000 Received: from mail-it1-x12a.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::12a]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ghX4u-0003JK-Pl for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:56:46 +0000 Received: by mail-it1-x12a.google.com with SMTP id m8so15020861itk.0 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 01:56:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Uki6XU7Nr4jIaQXwxnTdn//givtb+MdtG2zrxmsgApI=; b=vNpDI6cuf13JlWzm7Ph1/zgsnT8EaHYxyUI36tK18rp9KtGr7p+by+lLfgPcKMTZul EHKNhH63XfIAkX/NMylHnxP/8UR8pdRIJg2vGzfNIPQNWHhkFBn9NnG4z1qttK/7fb5L uRJl63cycsYsYN+PHx2CjQAokt0KTeBSyb1zriGwFq3463hdsHb0WlCPESafug42Kgzz xzi4jyrPgSLLYNojikGobJtst+asOZ5FX2wJjADPDmaLsdwDkTlE92jOJdI8eApy0dj+ JSTtUt7NGPe8EnyU1vu+hNiOYptq9RaHwiji0xjNIfn8pqfD3MNDn895PNLxfoRmL4k5 U9/A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Uki6XU7Nr4jIaQXwxnTdn//givtb+MdtG2zrxmsgApI=; b=UjRAJxRTwB7BN4VMJADR4QqdvytSvYIEqOawPx1pQVfQI1I8ZJujaccKzL3zNZphLQ 6Ju7CoCIwkVQnQL4GHG21d+lzxlDvmN8kaEadarnCik1qlmzm3FUTT4im/N93uo3S8ys XSVpY0nMO3p81Az5G05bqzF+qEDWcPVpw+szQrgAbYhJR67xrbtDprNk4qn5DPgRtDkl koASAlmYMN+qjBqNFscnGq1YNlwZQHM388jf2cY7hhu0/AOdeHtiQdDdcYAzmZvCfz+u J8Sm5ZWeJjqonA7JsKa6PEk7tGkGR8vBZupakttc9LHVlZsUC+xQlfAGdFMFMAz7UTIe xoQQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdrBS9Dw3ySQFXEh2ewokJyQLfgwhi6PaxcVw1KM/Cjla2Aur2+ AfPsWaNC+ulbokRgKvGGAgCyOemL0RPAOhR2xwABsmzb X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN461vRhbeqvUlkbNIMvy/PtS/GVyHQNW3GDsxOSTGaFcb/B43uhtib5gGL15UcKrJNCWy3BGSDtCVAS2WSXOdM= X-Received: by 2002:a24:78c7:: with SMTP id p190mr6415997itc.21.1547114201349; Thu, 10 Jan 2019 01:56:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Dean Rasheed Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:56:30 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Policy on cross-posting to multiple lists To: PostgreSQL Hackers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Has the policy on cross-posting to multiple lists been hardened recently? The "Crash on ALTER TABLE" thread [1] started on -bugs, but Andrew's message on 8 Jan with an initial proposed patch and my response later that day both CC'ed -hackers and seem to have been rejected, and so are missing from the archives. In that case, it's not a big deal because subsequent replies included the text from the missing messages, so it's still possible to follow the discussion, but I wanted to check whether this was an intentional change of policy. If so, it seems a bit harsh to flat-out reject these messages. My prior understanding was that cross-posting, while generally discouraged, does still sometimes have value. [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEZATCVqksrnXybSaogWOzmVjE3O-NqMSpoHDuDw9_7mhNpeLQ%40mail.gmail.com#2c25e9a783d4685912dcef8b3f3edd63 Regards, Dean