Re: Posting to hackers and patches lists

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Brendan Jurd wrote:
>  > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 12:17 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>  > > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
>  > >  > I think it would be helpful for us to provide an infrastructure where
>  > >  > people who don't run their own servers to store their patches at a
>  > >  > stable URL where they can keep updating the content.  I did that with
>  > >  > the psql wrap patch and it helped me.
>  > >
>  > >  Actually, I find that that is a truly awful habit and I wish that people
>  > >  would *not* do it that way.  There are two reasons why not:
>  > >
>  > >  * no permanent archive of the submitted patch
>  > >
>  >
>  > Yes.  I can see how posting a URL to a patch would be convenient, but
>  > having the permanent record of the patch as submitted is important.
>  >
>  > What about uploading patches to the wiki?  That way we have the
>  > permanent record (change history), as well as the single authoritative
>  > location for fetching the latest version.
>
>  Right, I was assuming once the patch was uploaded it would be to our
>  infrastructure and would be permanent.

Heck, I dont think patch submitters really care.  And Ill do whatever
is in the dev faq.
But Its a heck of a lot easier (for me) just to send them in email.
Plus it seems awkward to move a discussion thats taking place on
-hackers over to patches... Granted I could post to patches first,
wait an hour then send an email to hackers/reviewer and say hey!
updated patch here!  But it hardly seems worth it to me...  In fact I
would argue -patches should go away so we dont have that split.