Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 03:18:49PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote: > > I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors > > would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger > > items but

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 01/10/2016 06:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > [snip] > > No arguments with what was written above. +1. Very well written. > > > If we had an "issue" tracker rather than a bug tracker, I'd expect a >> lot more

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/11/2016 03:31 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: We can argue about if it's actually an easier management interface ;) (as long as it is manageable via email as well as web?) I'd agree with Robert in that it will cause some more such bickering -- but only because the discussions become

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> /me waves hand >> >> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people that >> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders. > > Sort of like how they could also have helped

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/10/2016 06:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote: [snip] No arguments with what was written above. If we had an "issue" tracker rather than a bug tracker, I'd expect a lot more unproductive bickering. This I disagree with. It wouldn't be any worse than we have now. An issue tracker (if it is a

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Greg Stark wrote: > This really sounds like you're looking for leverage to fix one problem > by finding other problems that you hope to solve with the same hammer. > That's a recipe for a tool that solves neither problem well and gets > ignored by

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 01/07/2016 12:32 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > >> On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> >>> Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation: >>> >>> "Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list" >>> >>> "Oh,

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/8/16 9:07 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Dunno about that. While a CF manager doesn't necessarily have to have a commit bit, I think he/she probably does have to be someone who is known and respected on the -hackers list. Otherwise, nagging to finish patches is likely to be ignored or even

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > I don't completely agree with that. I have often wanted to know when > a specific item was added to the TODO page, and/or its individual edit > history. Sure, there might be other things it would be better at. But my

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Magnus Hagander writes: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake >> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people that >> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders. > Sort of like how they

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander writes: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake > >> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people > that > >> could help out

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/06/2016 04:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote: On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness. An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more reasonable, but it certainly

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation: "Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list" "Oh, we've obsolesced that, that was added to the TODO before we had Y" ... by auto-closing TODO items at a certain age. Even if not auto-closed at least

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: >> Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness. >> An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more >>

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/07/2016 10:30 AM, Jeff Janes wrote: > I don't completely agree with that. I have often wanted to know when > a specific item was added to the TODO page, and/or its individual edit > history. With only a unified history of the entire TODO page, and > with no wiki equivalent of "git blame",

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/07/2016 12:32 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation: "Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list" "Oh, we've obsolesced that, that was added to the TODO before we had Y" ... by auto-closing TODO items at a

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:11 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: > Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list of "hey, > here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we come to that is the > TODO, which isn't well known and has almost no items for

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/06/2016 03:57 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: On 1/6/16 5:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Having said that, it occurs to me that one way to contribute without actually writing C code would be to try to drive those unfinished discussions to consensus, and come up with specs for features that people agree are

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Jim Nasby writes: > Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit > fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is really > just about reading through email activity to see where things are at. They don't need to be. Michael

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah. The other problem is that stuff that's actually small doesn't tend > to hang around undone for long, so there's not really a broad array of > stuff just waiting for someone to have a little time. If we had a more >

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Jim Nasby writes: >> Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit >> fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is really >> just about reading through email

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/6/16 9:22 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Jim Nasby writes: Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/6/16 6:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote: On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness. An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more reasonable, but it certainly wouldn't

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/6/16 2:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote: I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger items but hopefully at least some would. I

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Robert Haas writes: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote: >> I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors >> would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger >> items but hopefully at least

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote: > I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors > would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger > items but hopefully at least some would. I agree with this. Curating such a

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 01/05/2016 04:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > >On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake > >wrote: > >>linuxhiker: git interface! Bug tracker for this anywhere? > > > >Potential answer: Yes. As of now, pgsql-docs for doc issues, and

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Hello, So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described the basic workflow and the individual was excited. His first question? linuxhiker: git interface! Bug tracker for this anywhere?

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Hello, > > So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could > easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described > the basic workflow and the individual was excited. >

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 1/5/16 6:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described the basic workflow and

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01/05/2016 04:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: Hello, So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described the basic

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Jim, all, * Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote: > Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list > of "hey, here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we > come to that is the TODO, which isn't well known and has almost no > items for newbies (and the newbie

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wednesday 30 September 2015 14:41:34 you wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:08:56PM +1300, Gavin Flower wrote: > > Linux kernel project uses bugzilla (https://bugzilla.kernel.org) > > AIUI this is not mandatory for kernel hackers, and more opt-in from a > some/many/a few(?) subsystem

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to > > store and parse email messages]. > > Yeah. It actually made most of the work

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote: > On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to > > store and parse email messages]. > > Yeah. It actually made most of the work

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote: > I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked > a > message to reply to. > > Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a > bugs > mailing list, I put together

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Nathan Wagner > wrote: >> >> I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked >> a >> message to reply to. >> >> Since what has been

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked a message to reply to. Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a bugs mailing list, I put together something. I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

Nathan Wagner wrote: > 1: Can a bug be more than "open" or "closed"? > > I think yes. At least we probably want to know why a bug is closed. Is it > not > a bug at all, not our bug, a duplicate submission, a duplicate of another bug, > something we won't fix for some reason (e.g. a bug

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to > store and parse email messages]. Yeah. It actually made most of the work pretty easy. It's available with a bunch of other code at https://pd.if.org/git/ if

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

On 10/04/2015 03:42 PM, Nathan Wagner wrote: > I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This > part was easy, since I have already written a pg backed usenet server and had > the code hand for storing and parsing out bits of rfc 2822 messages. That would be the key

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!]

I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked a message to reply to. Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a bugs mailing list, I put together something. I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Steve Crawford < scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:16 AM, David Fetter wrote: > >> ...What we're not fine with is depending on a proprietary system, no >> matter what type of license, as infrastructure... >> >> >

Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

Hello, I believe it is pretty obvious we are moving in the direction of having a tracker at this point. The problem is exactly which direction. Stephen has offered some resources for his ideas and now I am offering some resources for mine. I am proposing to setup a redmine instance on a VM.

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

> On 2 Oct 2015, at 17:28, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > Hello, > > I believe it is pretty obvious we are moving in the direction of having a > tracker at this point. The problem is exactly which direction. Stephen has > offered some resources for his ideas and now I am

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On 10/02/2015 11:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote: I don't know what this has to do with anything Andres said. I am sorry if I wasn't clear. Put succinctly, I am willing to put resources into testing Redmine for our needs. I will need help to do so because I am not a committer/hacker. Andres

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On 10/02/2015 09:34 AM, Dave Page wrote: Thoughts? Volunteers? I swore to myself that I'd stay out of this bikeshed, but... we already have a Redmine instance. I know but I didn't want to dogfood in an installation that was production. I am not going to put up vanilla redmine, I actually

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > >> >> - Bug numbers are sometimes preserved in commit messages, but they >> never make it into release notes. This actually seems like

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

Hi, On 2015-10-02 09:28:02 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I am proposing to setup a redmine instance on a VM. I am happy to do a lot > of the legwork and should be able to get most of it done before EU. This is > what I think I need from my fellows: -1. This thread has already cost

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On 10/02/2015 09:41 AM, Andres Freund wrote: Hi, On 2015-10-02 09:28:02 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: I am proposing to setup a redmine instance on a VM. I am happy to do a lot of the legwork and should be able to get most of it done before EU. This is what I think I need from my fellows:

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I once drove a manual all the time. I swore by the manual. I loved the > control, the feeling (ridiculously) that I was a race car driver on the > Urban track. > > Then I got an automatic and realized how damn nice

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > I am sorry if I wasn't clear. > > Put succinctly, I am willing to put resources into testing Redmine for our > needs. I will need help to do so because I am not a committer/hacker. Andres > thinks that isn't worth

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On 10/02/2015 12:52 PM, Robert Haas wrote: OK. My reading of the thread is that the hackers who expressed an opinion mostly preferred debbugs and the people less involved in the project wanted something more like GitHub/GitLab. Some people also argued for and against Bugzilla and JIRA. I

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Put succinctly, I am willing to put resources into testing Redmine for our > needs. I will need help to do so because I am not a committer/hacker. Andres > thinks that isn't worth while. I think he is wrong. If he doesn't want to > help, he doesn't have to, thus the call

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: >> Put succinctly, I am willing to put resources into testing Redmine for our >> needs. I will need help to do so because I am not a committer/hacker. Andres >> thinks that isn't worth while.

Re: Request for dogfood volunteers (was [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!)

On 10/02/2015 01:26 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: However, the contact surface between these two options wasn't really well polished. Formatting would be lost very frequently: I could write a nice email, and the customer would get a nice email, but if you looked at it in the web, it was very

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 01.10.2015 00:27, Tom Lane wrote: Josh Berkus writes: On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make something happen here". The

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Robert Haas writes: > - Bug numbers are sometimes preserved in commit messages, but they > never make it into release notes. This actually seems like something > we could improve pretty easily and without a lot of extra work (and > also without a bug tracker). If every

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 10/01/2015 10:35 AM, Robert Haas wrote: On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that mailing lists are insufficient

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the > initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do > themselves today. But there is in itself nothing that prevents them from > doing that, of course - other

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure > wrote: > > I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your > > blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Andres Freund writes: > On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> As one of the people who do most of the gruntwork for release notes, >> I can tell you that that sort of fixed-format annotation is useless >> and usually annoying. I can see what branches you fixed the

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your > blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that > mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and expected to be > taken

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Josh Berkus writes: > > On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people > >> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make > >> something

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: > > On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the > >> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do > >>

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Andres Freund writes: > On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the >> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do >> themselves today. But there is in itself nothing that

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 10/01/2015 07:48 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: But using the bugtracker for the discussion itself is usually not a win. I know you said usually but: In fact, I'd say in most cases it's counterproductive because it forces a single tool upon everybody, instead of email which allows each

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund writes: >> On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> As one of the people who do most of the gruntwork for release notes, >>> I can tell you that that sort of fixed-format annotation

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 10/01/2015 08:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: I'm inclined to think that commit messages are not really the right medium for that at all. Commit messages ought to be primarily text for consumption by humans.

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 10/01/2015 07:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Playing devil's advocate ... would this really do much other than bloat > the release notes? The entire assumption of this thread is that people > don't, or don't want to, use the release notes to find out what got fixed; > they'd rather search a tracker.

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 10/01/2015 05:10 PM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> Andres Freund writes: >>> On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the initial thread as well

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 10/01/2015 07:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Playing devil's advocate ... would this really do much other than bloat >> the release notes? The entire assumption of this thread is that people >> don't, or don't want to, use

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

> On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Josh Berkus writes: >>> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff < mailingli...@toco-domains.de> wrote: > On 01.10.2015 00:27, Tom Lane wrote: > >> Josh Berkus writes: >> >>> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 01:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: If people are hell-bent on every tool being separate then fine, but I get the distinct impression that everyone is discarding GitLab out of hand based on completely bogus information. Right, we need to

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Frankly, an insistence on moving to some integrated solution is likely to result in the adoption of nothing. And your "educating hackers who don't understand" is more than a little patronizing. What makes you think your experience in software

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 02:16 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: On 09/30/2015 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Frankly, an insistence on moving to some integrated solution is likely to result in the adoption of nothing. And your "educating hackers who don't understand" is more than a little patronizing. What

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: If people are hell-bent on every tool being separate then fine, but I get the distinct impression that everyone is discarding GitLab out of hand based on completely bogus information. Right, we need to stop thinking that every task is not interrelated.

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your > blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that > mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and expected to be > taken on faith: *How* is it

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 11:23 AM, Christopher Browne wrote: It's well and nice to think that an issue tracker resolves all of this, and, if we had tiny numbers of issues, we could doubtless construct a repository indicating so. (Seems to me that the bit of "fan service" for GitHub's bug tracker fits

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 11:33 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Who exactly is "some guy sitting in a den pushing out code"? And if that's not a patronizing put down I don't know what is. If you're referring to me you couldn't be more wrong. I have been a development director managing a couple of substantial

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 9/29/15 3:36 PM, Oleg Bartunov wrote: ...What we're not fine with is depending on a proprietary system, no matter what type of license, as infrastructure... Exactly. Which is why I was warning about latching onto features only available in

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 9/29/15 12:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Andres Freund writes: On 2015-09-29 13:40:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: I think you missed my point: gitlab would then believe it's in charge of, eg, granting write access to that repo. We could perhaps whack it over the head till it only

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: > I wish people would at least consider this as an option because it > integrates a ton of different features together. It has *the potential* > to eliminate our need to keep maintaining CommitFest and buildfarm and > could also replace mediawiki. > > If

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera > wrote: > > > That's a very good point. I think Github and other sites are already > > blocked in countries like India and Cuba. > > Github is not blocked in India and was never as far as I know.

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:08:56PM +1300, Gavin Flower wrote: > Linux kernel project uses bugzilla (https://bugzilla.kernel.org) AIUI this is not mandatory for kernel hackers, and more opt-in from a some/many/a few(?) subsystem maintainers. Some parts use it more, some less or not at all. > and

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all >> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table. > > Here are the problems I'd like to solve: > > 1.

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Josh Berkus writes: >> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people >>> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make >>> something

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Josh Berkus writes: > On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people >> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make >> something happen here". The lack of any volunteers suggests

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 03:28 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote: Josh Berkus writes: On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 30 September 2015 at 14:31, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > On 09/30/2015 11:23 AM, Christopher Browne wrote: > >> It's well and nice to think that an issue tracker resolves all of this, >> and, if we >> had tiny numbers of issues, we could doubtless construct a repository

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your >> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that >> mailing lists are

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Christopher Browne writes: > It may very well be *worse* than that; it seems quite likely to me that if > an issue tracker is not being continually curated by substantially ALL of > its users, then you don't get any of those things. That *is* a lot more > pessimistic, and

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people > had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make > something happen here". The lack of any volunteers suggests strongly > that this thread is a waste of

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

Josh Berkus wrote: > Well, it's hard for anyone to volunteer when we don't know what the > actual volunteer tasks are. I certainly intend to do *something* to > support the bug tracker system, but I don't know yet what that something is. I volunteer to do something too, as long as I don't have

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 09/30/2015 03:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Josh Berkus wrote: Well, it's hard for anyone to volunteer when we don't know what the actual volunteer tasks are. I certainly intend to do *something* to support the bug tracker system, but I don't know yet what that something is. I volunteer

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Christopher Browne writes: >> It may very well be *worse* than that; it seems quite likely to me that if >> an issue tracker is not being continually curated by substantially ALL of >> its users, then you

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 9/30/15 4:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote: I wish people would at least consider this as an option because it integrates a ton of different features together. It has *the potential* to eliminate our need to keep maintaining CommitFest and buildfarm and could

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On 30 September 2015 at 12:26, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: > >> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your >> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that >> mailing lists are

Re: [HACKERS] No Issue Tracker - Say it Ain't So!

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Kam Lasater wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >>> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all >>> to me what a issue/bug

  1   2   3   >