"Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> If not, would it be possible to some how force reply-to of pg-patches to >> -hackers? > > No, we aren't going to do that. It wouldn't work anyway; you can't > force people to send messages to one list rather than another, and > the mail list software is surely not bright enough to distinguish > "patch" from "not a patch" on its own.
I did suggest something a while back that I think died for because too many other things were changing at the same time. Perhaps would be more practical with the current infrastructure. I suggested eliminating pgsql-patches as a separate mailing list for people to send mail to. Instead you could subscribe to a version of pgsql-hackers which automatically had large attachments removed and replaced with a link to the file on a web page. So all followups would be on -hackers because they would follow the headers on the original message. The only place the -noattachments list would show up would be buried in the Received headers. I could help make a perl script to do the message munging but this assumes there's a way to hook it into the mail server and get the files to the web server. I'm not familiar with the infrastructure so I don't know how accessible these things are to each other. -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
