Joseph Shraibman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Barry Lind wrote:
>> If you want this patch to be applied it should be sent to the 
>> pgsql-patches mail list.

> I thought that jdbc stuff was preferred to be on the jdbc list.
> I guess not.

Well, patches are patches, and it's easier for the committers to spot
proposed patches that go by on pgsql-patches.  However, the people who
are competent to review JDBC patches all seem to be hanging out on the
JDBC list.  Seems like there are a couple of ways that we could handle

1. First draft of a JDBC patch goes to JDBC list; if it passes muster
there then resend to pgsql-patches for application.

2. JDBC patches go to psql-patches only, and interested JDBC people
subscribe to pgsql-patches so they can kibitz.

3. We give commit privileges to one or two JDBC regulars, who take
responsibility for reviewing and applying JDBC-related patches after
discussion on pgsql-jdbc.  (This was the old setup with Peter Mount,
but he seems not to have many spare cycles for Postgres anymore.)

Of these #3 seems like the solution that will emerge in the long term
anyway; but do we have candidate patch-meisters now?

Comments, better ideas, nominations, volunteers?

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to