Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Am Donnerstag, 10. April 2008 schrieb Tom Lane:
>> Another is that the email list provides a
>> "push" mechanism for putting the proposed patch under the noses of a
>> bunch of people, a few of whom will hopefully take a sniff ;-).
>> A tracker is very much more of a "pull" scenario where someone has to
>> actively go looking for pending/proposed changes.
> In my mind the pull mechanism is exactly one of the major features I would
> expect from a proper tracking system, so I can "pull" and work on the issues
> that affect me at a time when it is convenient for me, instead of at the time
> when the "push" happens.
Of course. The point is we need both, since each way scratches a
different itch.
Also, I'm quite hesitant to abandon a working process --- our
email-based procedures have served the project pretty well over the past
ten-plus years, else we'd not be here having this discussion. So, at
least in the beginning, I want to layer any tracking process over what
we already do, not make a big change for unproven results.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
