Re: New CF app deployment

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:22 AM, Andrew Gierth
> <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> wrote:
>> There's a fairly serious readability problem when someone has posted a
>> patch as a subthread of some more general discussion. For example, look
>> at the "adaptive ndistinct estimator" patch: it's not obvious which
>> attachment is the actual patch, and whether the latest email has
>> anything to do with the patch is entirely arbitrary.
>
> I think that the inability to put each message in context, with
> "metadata" comments associated with individual messages is a serious
> regression in functionality. I hope it is fixed soon. I raised this
> issue at the earliest opportunity, when Magnus privately sought
> feedback early last year.

I agree. Starting a new email thread for each patch version is, IMHO,
a complete non-starter. It's 100% contrary to what has generally been
advocated as best-practice up until now, and it is basically saying we
should alter our workflow because the tool can't cope with the one
we've got. The whole point of having home-grown tools for this stuff
is that they're supposed to work with the way we already like to do
things instead of forcing us to work in new ways.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company