On mån, 2011-05-30 at 20:16 -0400, Christopher Browne wrote:
> My suspicion is that RT may be rather a lot heavier weight in terms of
> how it would have to affect process than people would be happy with.
> What has been pretty clearly expressed is that various of the
> developers prefer for the mailing lists and archives thereof to be the
> primary data source and the "venue" for bug discussions.
> RT, and Bugzilla, and pretty well the bulk of the issue trackers out
> there are designed to themselves be the "venue" for discussions, and
> that's not consistent with the preference for email discussions.
> I'd be more optimistic that debbugs, or an adaption thereof, might
> more nearly fit into the workflow.
Any bug tracker that has an adequate email interface will be isomorphic
in terms of how intrusive it is.
So I think your argument above is merely a reflection of how people have
traditionally used these systems, not how they have to be used.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2011-05-31 08:12:43|
|Subject: Re: Getting a bug tracker for the Postgres project|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2011-05-31 08:06:57|
|Subject: Re: Fix for GiST penalty|