On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of mar may 11 09:58:34 -0400
>> 2010:
>>
>>> If list traffic, especially on -hackers, is getting so large, should we
>>> look at maybe splitting it? I could easily enough split things such that
>>> I duplicate the subscriber list, so nobody would have to subscribe, but
>>> it
>>> would make it easier for ppl to filter their incoming ... ?
>>
>> Maybe we could create a separate list where people would send patches,
>> and keep patchless discussion on -hackers?
>>
>> Just a thought ;-)
>
> The thing is, it seems to me, especially now that we have such strong commit
> fests, that we should have a seperate form for 'design phase' then for
> 'reivew discusions' ... *shrug*
>
> There may be some that are interested in what is being implemented, but
> don't really care about how it was implemented ...
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine. Exactly how far people go with
the design discussion before reducing it to code varies from person to
person and project to project. I think the way to satisfy the people
who want to know what but not how is through vehicles like PWN and
blog postings.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company