On 10/06/2015 10:57 AM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 10/06/2015 10:17 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:

This is kind of like CVS.  We didn't upgrade so Subversion, becuase we
said "we already have a user-friendly interface to CVS, called Marc."
We only moved to git when it could provide us with solid advantages.

This is a very good point.

I believe the same thing is happening here.  The inefficiency of the old
system (Bruce's mailbox) is becoming higher than the inefficiency of a
new, hypothetical system.

As one of the longest running contributors to this community, I didn't even know that is where bugs went. How I didn't know this, I have no idea :P

Second, we have a mix of user reports.  Some bug reports are not bugs
and must be reclassified.  In other cases, uses ask questions via
non-tracked communicate channels, e.g. pgsql-general, but they are
really bugs.  So, to do this right, we need a way of marking tracked
bugs as not bugs, and a way of adding bugs that were reported in a
non-tracked manner.

Yeah, I was wondering about that.

Right, that is why I am trying to push us toward an "issue" tracker not a bug tracker. A bug tracker explicitly limits the purpose of something that may otherwise be a huge boon to this community.

Speaking of which ... this project is rich in skilled users who are
involved in the community but don't code.  Bug triage is exactly the
kind of thing very part-time community supporters can do, if we make it
easy for them to do.

That is an understatement. There is a huge pool of non-hackers that can
help contribute to this sort of thing.


Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/  503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
New rule for social situations: "If you think to yourself not even
JD would say this..." Stop and shut your mouth. It's going to be bad.

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to