List traffic
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.
If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.
Thanks!
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.
[ email only to hackers; admin and general email lists removed ]
I completely understand the problem of keeping up with the email lists.
Because you are a committer, I hope you will be able to monitor
post-commit feedback for patches you apply. Other than that, I can
collect bug reports related to your work and ask you to review a web
page occasionally. However, it is hard to do this during beta because
the bugs usually need to be addressed quickly.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.[ email only to hackers; admin and general email lists removed ]
I completely understand the problem of keeping up with the email lists.
Because you are a committer, I hope you will be able to monitor
post-commit feedback for patches you apply. Other than that, I can
collect bug reports related to your work and ask you to review a web
page occasionally. However, it is hard to do this during beta because
the bugs usually need to be addressed quickly.
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 ... ?
Not sure where the split would be, mind you ... almost thinking about
patch review / discussions vs hashing out new features or something like
that ...
Just a thought ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.[ email only to hackers; admin and general email lists removed ]
I completely understand the problem of keeping up with the email lists.
Because you are a committer, I hope you will be able to monitor
post-commit feedback for patches you apply. Other than that, I can
collect bug reports related to your work and ask you to review a web
page occasionally. However, it is hard to do this during beta because
the bugs usually need to be addressed quickly.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 ... ?
Can we *PLEASE* not go down that route again?
We already have way too many lists. Making more of them will just make
things more annoying, because people will just end up crossposting
everywhere so people don't miss it.
There are good client-side (or cloud-side) tools to handle priorities,
etc, that works much better.
Not sure where the split would be, mind you ... almost thinking about patch review / discussions vs hashing out new features or something like that ...
We just *discontinued* -patches.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 09:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.[ email only to hackers; admin and general email lists removed ]
I completely understand the problem of keeping up with the email lists.
Because you are a committer, I hope you will be able to monitor
post-commit feedback for patches you apply. Other than that, I can
collect bug reports related to your work and ask you to review a web
page occasionally. However, it is hard to do this during beta because
the bugs usually need to be addressed quickly.
Thanks. I have already been keeping a public known bugs/issues list for
more than a year. I do monitor for post-commit feedback, though reading
all emails isn't always possible when I'm working on resolving current
bugs.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 09:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I have no problem
in being copied in on mails so that I can see the issues exist. I do not
promise to respond to every mail I'm copied on, though, but it at least
helps me manage the fire hydrant.[ email only to hackers; admin and general email lists removed ]
I completely understand the problem of keeping up with the email lists.
Because you are a committer, I hope you will be able to monitor
post-commit feedback for patches you apply. Other than that, I can
collect bug reports related to your work and ask you to review a web
page occasionally. However, it is hard to do this during beta because
the bugs usually need to be addressed quickly.Thanks. I have already been keeping a public known bugs/issues list for
more than a year. I do monitor for post-commit feedback, though reading
all emails isn't always possible when I'm working on resolving current
bugs.
Sure. You did a huge job of getting HS done and I will try to help
where I can, and I know you have a business to run
(http://www.2ndquadrant.com/).
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
Not sure where the split would be, mind you ... almost thinking about patch review / discussions vs hashing out new features or something like that ...
We just *discontinued* -patches.
Yeah, it's not time to reverse that decision.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 10:23 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Sure. You did a huge job of getting HS done and I will try to help
where I can, and I know you have a business to run
(http://www.2ndquadrant.com/).
2ndQuadrant is in the end the main and final reason Hot Standby exists
and has now funded more than two-thirds of project costs, though the
support of many others is very much appreciated. Luckily the business is
successful and there are marketing and administration people to handle
commercial matters now, while the team is working on open source
projects and advocacy. As a privately held company it's easier to
control our own destiny. Offering 24/7 support helps fund more time on
open source development projects from all members of the now much
expanded tech team.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
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 ;-)
--
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 ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.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
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine.
And importantly -- who would be able to subscribe to one and not the
other? If you have to subscribe to both to get make any sense of
things then there's no point.
Fwiw I'm having trouble keeping up these days too. And I'm quite
accustomed to very heavy traffic email. I've been throwing all
postgres related lists into one folder and skimmed through it looking
for important threads. However this has now broken down. There are
about 45 new threads every day. I've been travelling for a bit and am
now 1,500 threads behind...
If we can find a way to split the content sensibly so I could stop
reading some of it that would be helpful. But cutting splitting it
along subject matter where both sets of subject matter need to be seen
by the same people doesn't really help.
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another
folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and
-performance. They're a random mix of user content and developer
content. I'll probably move them along with -general but that means I
won't be likely to see any development discussion on them in the
future.
--
greg
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another
folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance.
They're a random mix of user content and developer content. I'll
probably move them along with -general but that means I won't be likely
to see any development discussion on them in the future
There shouldn't be any dev discussions on them as it is ... that isn't
their mandate ... those are/were meant to be end-user lists, not
developer ones ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance. They're a random mix of user content and developer content. I'll probably move them along with -general but that means I won't be likely to see any development discussion on them in the future
There shouldn't be any dev discussions on them as it is ... that isn't their mandate ... those are/were meant to be end-user lists, not developer ones ...
We know from experience that doesn't work. People just end up
crossposting, because they're not sure people are on both lists. And
then you want to move a discussion, which just means you have to CC in
both lists, leading to even more duplication.
If there was a clear distinction between end-user and dev it might
make sense. That how commercial software companies tend to work -
don't let devs talk to end users. That's not how we work. Forcing
people to look in different places just throws hurdles in front of
those trying to help out.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Le 11/05/2010 19:24, Alvaro Herrera a écrit :
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 ;-)
Here's a simple description of how i use and see the -hackers list. I'm
what you could call a "silent reader", like many other subscribers i
don't participate to the discussions but i'm happy to be able to follow
them. I'm not an end-user and i'm not a developper. Just a guy that
wants to follow the "making-of" this project.
Sure the traffic is huge and sometimes i have thousands of unread
messages. But somewhat i managed to follow the threads i'm interested in
and leave asides others...
If this list is split in two smaller ones, then i guess i'll follow both
and it won't help me in any way. I guess it would even make things more
difficult to understand.
This is my modest experience. Clearly things can be improved, but
speaking for myself i don't think that splitting the list is a good idea.
--
damien clochard
http://www.dalibo.com
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance. They're a random mix of user content and developer content. I'll probably move them along with -general but that means I won't be likely to see any development discussion on them in the future
There shouldn't be any dev discussions on them as it is ... that isn't their mandate ... those are/were meant to be end-user lists, not developer ones ...
We know from experience that doesn't work. People just end up
crossposting, because they're not sure people are on both lists. And
then you want to move a discussion, which just means you have to CC in
both lists, leading to even more duplication.If there was a clear distinction between end-user and dev it might
make sense. That how commercial software companies tend to work -
don't let devs talk to end users. That's not how we work. Forcing
people to look in different places just throws hurdles in front of
those trying to help out.
What *are* you talking about? This doesn't seem to have anything related
to what I said :)
All I was saying was that -performance and -admin are not development
discusion lists, not that developers aren't subscribed / talking on them
... that doesn't make them any less end-user lists ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance. They're a random mix of user content and developer content. I'll probably move them along with -general but that means I won't be likely to see any development discussion on them in the future
There shouldn't be any dev discussions on them as it is ... that isn't their mandate ... those are/were meant to be end-user lists, not developer ones ...
We know from experience that doesn't work. People just end up
crossposting, because they're not sure people are on both lists. And
then you want to move a discussion, which just means you have to CC in
both lists, leading to even more duplication.If there was a clear distinction between end-user and dev it might
make sense. That how commercial software companies tend to work -
don't let devs talk to end users. That's not how we work. Forcing
people to look in different places just throws hurdles in front of
those trying to help out.What *are* you talking about? This doesn't seem to have anything related to what I said :)
All I was saying was that -performance and -admin are not development discusion lists, not that developers aren't subscribed / talking on them ... that doesn't make them any less end-user lists ...
Yes, and I'm saying there is no real difference between end-user,
development, admin and performance. The amount of crossover is so
large the distinction rapidly becomes pointless.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
My thought had been a split along the lines of major components of the
server ... for instance, a totally seperate list for HS related issues, so
that, if nothing else, those 'lurkers' that are only interested in
developments on that front could be there but not on the main stream
-hackers ... almost like seperate working groups ...
Twas just a thought ...
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine.And importantly -- who would be able to subscribe to one and not the
other? If you have to subscribe to both to get make any sense of
things then there's no point.Fwiw I'm having trouble keeping up these days too. And I'm quite
accustomed to very heavy traffic email. I've been throwing all
postgres related lists into one folder and skimmed through it looking
for important threads. However this has now broken down. There are
about 45 new threads every day. I've been travelling for a bit and am
now 1,500 threads behind...If we can find a way to split the content sensibly so I could stop
reading some of it that would be helpful. But cutting splitting it
along subject matter where both sets of subject matter need to be seen
by the same people doesn't really help.I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another
folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and
-performance. They're a random mix of user content and developer
content. I'll probably move them along with -general but that means I
won't be likely to see any development discussion on them in the
future.--
greg--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine.And importantly -- who would be able to subscribe to one and not the
other? If you have to subscribe to both to get make any sense of
things then there's no point.Fwiw I'm having trouble keeping up these days too. And I'm quite
accustomed to very heavy traffic email. I've been throwing all
postgres related lists into one folder and skimmed through it looking
for important threads. However this has now broken down. There are
about 45 new threads every day. I've been travelling for a bit and am
now 1,500 threads behind...
I've only been actively reading the pg lists for a few months now, after
several previous attempts that failed mainly because the way I set it up
did not work nice, mainly because of the volume. I tried digests, didn't
like it (how to reply?), also didn't like that the pg mails that were so
many completely swamped the 'main' email I use.
Now I made a new gmail account, subscribed to all lists with some volume
and let it all message per message come into the inbox. Together with
thunderbird/imap this works quite nicely. With filters it's possible to
tag interesting messages (like does the To: contain my email? -> tag it
so it becomes green). Now I only need to view unread mails, (by thread
or date), read some messages and then ctrl-shift-c - all read.
My $0.02 - I like the whole 'don't sort, search' (or how did they call
it?) just let the inbox fill up, google is fast enough. What would be
really interesting is to have some extra 'tags/headers' added to the
emails (document classification with e.g. self organizing map/kohonen),
so my local filters could make labels based on that, instead of perhaps
badly spelled keywords in subjects or message body.
regards,
Yeb Havinga
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org> wrote:
My thought had been a split along the lines of major components of the server ... for instance, a totally seperate list for HS related issues, so that, if nothing else, those 'lurkers' that are only interested in developments on that front could be there but not on the main stream -hackers ... almost like seperate working groups ...
We tried that with pgsql-hackers-win32 and iirc also
pgsql-hackers-pitr, and it was a big failure...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
