Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Date: 2004-02-27 14:29:24
Message-ID: 403F5444.9080305@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackerspgsql-hackers-win32pgsql-www

Josh Berkus wrote:

>Tom,
>
>  
>
>>Possibly workable, but what's your definition of "registered user"?
>>    
>>
>
>Signing up via a webform, getting an e-mailed password back, logging in.
>
>  
>
>>I'd hope that anyone subscribed to any of the mailing lists would be
>>considered registered, for instance.  Not sure if we can do that with
>>either BZ or GForge; anyone know?
>>    
>>
>
>Usually it works the other way around; people can't subscribe until they've 
>registered via web.
>  
>


I believe it should not be hard to do a one-time bulk registration of 
everyone on the lists, if that was desired.

Stepping back a bit and gathering a few threads.

BZ versions etc. There is finally some movement in the mainline BZ code 
to get DB independence into it - and the first DB to benefit will be 
Postgres.  Dave Lawrence at RedHat appears to be working again on 
landing this (after a long hiatus). See  
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98304 and 
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146679 . The reason I would 
prefer to go with mainline BZ (assuming we go with BZ at all) is that my 
past experience of upgrading BZ has not been pleasant, and I am sure it 
would be even harder doing it from a fork like the RedHat one.

Signal to Noise. It's not at all clear to me why a bug tracking system 
should have a worse signal to noise ratio than a mailing list with 
similar access rules, especially since we also provide the facility to 
log bugs through a web form directly off the postgresql.org home page. 
But even if it does, that can be managed by good triage. That should 
improve the ratio for all but those doing the triage. Personally, I'd be 
surprised if it took one knowledgable person more than 30 minutes a day 
to weed out the garbage (sorry for the mixed metaphor), and if the load 
was spread across several people it would be just a few minutes a day 
for any one of them, at a significant saving to everyone else.

Email interface: it should not be beyond the wit of man to provide some 
level of email interface to any reasonable bug tracking system. Whether 
or not it is worth doing depends on the demand. Two obvious places for 
it would be 1) to allow initial logging of a bug via email, and 2) 
periodically run query 'foo' and email me the results. Getting a once a 
day digest of new bug reports might be quite nice in fact.

One size fits all: I understood that this discussion arose in the 
context of a suggestion to migrate GBorg to a GForge base (a proposal I 
generally support). What is right for the core project might well not be 
right for GBorg projects. Perhaps a conservative approach might be to 
try things out on GBorg/GForge and see how things go, without touching 
how the core operates for now.

cheers

andrew




In response to

Responses

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2004-02-27 14:51:27
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous:From: Chris RyanDate: 2004-02-27 13:31:30
Subject: Re: Feeds Integration

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2004-02-27 14:51:27
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous:From: Dan LangilleDate: 2004-02-27 12:35:16
Subject: Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Chris GamacheDate: 2004-02-27 14:38:51
Subject: Re: Any Gentoo users interested in a slotted PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Bruno Wolff IIIDate: 2004-02-27 14:29:17
Subject: Re: bgwriter never dies

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Shridhar DaithankarDate: 2004-02-27 14:51:27
Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous:From: Josh BerkusDate: 2004-02-27 07:11:14
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group