| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bugs and bug tracking |
| Date: | 2015-10-07 17:52:52 |
| Message-ID: | 20151007175252.GB3685@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Stephen Frost (sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net) wrote:
> Perhaps it'd be better to have pgsql-bugs be the "Package owner", who
> also gets emails about bug activity on their packages. That way, we
> could have a 'jdbc' package whose owner is pgsql-jdbc and pgsql-bugs
> wouldn't end up with that bug traffic (which, I believe, is what we'd
> want...).
To clarify, I mean 'Maintainer', and this would be identical to how the
PostgreSQL packages in Debian are currently maintained:
Maintainers for postgresql are Debian PostgreSQL Maintainers
<pkg-postgresql-public(at)lists(dot)alioth(dot)debian(dot)org>.
And, handily, that list is archived here:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-postgresql-public/
One example of how it's used can be seen with this thread:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-postgresql-public/2015-September/002803.html
Thanks!
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-10-07 17:58:41 | Re: bugs and bug tracking |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2015-10-07 17:44:42 | Re: bugs and bug tracking |