| From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, w^3 <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: 9.2beta web issues |
| Date: | 2012-07-11 20:52:02 |
| Message-ID: | 4FFDE772.8010604@kaltenbrunner.cc |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-www |
On 07/11/2012 10:46 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> +1. Adding a mailing list is not exactly the hardest part of getting
>> a formal QA effort going. Moreover, if the previous rationale for having
>> pgsql-testing was that it was a place where newbies could feel sheltered
>> while posting bug reports, how are the existing subscribers going to
>> relate to what Josh is now suggesting? Repurposing this list for that
>> usage seems entirely inappropriate.
>
> Well, the ones who've spoken up would be fine with it. But I'm not sure
> how many people are on now.
>
> If we kill the list, though, I'll be directing people to submit
> *successful* test reports (i.e. "this worked") to pgsql-bugs. Please
> make sure that's what you want.
well checking the archives on pgsql-testers (on a quick look) only
turned up a SINGLE "successful" test report in the last two years among
a hundred or so of "this is a bug or looks broken" ones which are just
fine for -bugs, so I dont see how that will be a problem...
Stefan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-11 21:07:24 | Re: 9.2beta web issues |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-07-11 20:46:46 | Re: 9.2beta web issues |