| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Commit fest queue |
| Date: | 2008-04-10 16:21:06 |
| Message-ID: | 2846.1207844466@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> (I wonder what should happen if a message is posted to more than one
> list.)
That's a good question. I suppose there are actually multiple archive
entries in that case --- which one is the message-id link taking me to?
I guess whichever list appears first in the To/Cc fields would be the
best choice. This is a bit of a problem though, since if discussion
ensued on the other list(s) you'd not see any link to it on that page.
One of the things that would have to happen with any tracker system
is that we'd need links to each of the related threads when a discussion
gets fragmented like that. Is that a candidate for automation, or
will it have to be done manually?
(Another thing that really, really, really needs to get fixed is the
archives' inability to link threads across month boundaries.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-04-10 16:35:56 | Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-04-10 16:13:41 | Re: Commit fest queue |