From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: 9.2beta web issues |
Date: | 2012-07-05 21:44:10 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEybVA7dEeBUekoinBpLn40jWjhYHdhzPJj=f-p1ZYPRgg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:41 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)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/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-07-05 21:49:50 | Re: 9.2beta web issues |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-05 21:41:28 | Re: 9.2beta web issues |