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... >> >> >

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: [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

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 insufficient

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

Hello, On 29.09.2015 00:34, Tom Lane wrote: Jim Nasby writes: On 9/28/15 11:43 AM, Andres Freund wrote: It has been stated pretty clearly in this thread by a number of senior community people that we're not going to use a closed source system. GitLab OTOH is

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

On 29.09.2015 05:54, Tom Lane wrote: Stephen Frost writes: * Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote: 2 years ago is when they first released the enterprise edition, which according to [1] had "The most important new feature is that you can now add members to groups of

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

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > Note that since they also offer a hosted solution we should use that to > play with instead of trying to install it at this point. > > Integrating the issue tracker looks like it's just a call to this API: >

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

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Kam Lasater wrote: > Hello, > > Last night I heard that Postgres had no issue/bug tracker. At first I > thought the guy was trolling me. Seriously, how could this be. Certainly a > mature open source project that is the database for a measurable

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

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... > > Exactly. Which is why I was warning about latching onto features only available in the closed

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

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 07:01:16AM -0700, Steve Crawford wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jim Nasby wrote: > > > Note that since they also offer a hosted solution we should use that to > > play with instead of trying to install it at this point. > > > >

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

On 09/29/2015 10:55 AM, Steve Crawford 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... Exactly. Which is

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

Alvaro Herrera writes: > 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. > In my opinion, this thread is about a bug tracker, not a patch tracker. > We already have a

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

Oleg Bartunov wrote: > me too, but I have to mention one problem we should have in mind - it's > independency from political games (sanctions). Think about developers from > Russia, who one day may be blocked by Github, for example. That's a very good point. I think Github and other sites are

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

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 09/29/2015 10:55 AM, Steve Crawford wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:16 AM, David Fetter da...@fetter.org>> wrote: >> >> ...What we're not fine with is depending on a proprietary

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

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On 09/29/2015 07:25 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Kam Lasater wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Last night I heard that Postgres had no issue/bug tracker. At

  1   2   3   >