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

Re: Trac tickets

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Trac tickets
Date: 2010-12-30 10:32:04
Message-ID: AANLkTi=OEhTVO9_TSDQqPNMCV22noskVXQDWMG2X+UzJ@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 14:09, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> Le vendredi 7 août 2009 à 13:35:51, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:48, Dave Page<dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Guillaume
>> >
>> > Lelarge<guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> >> Le jeudi 6 août 2009 à 13:10:24, Dave Page a écrit :
>> >>> Why are trac tickets being created for the recent change history?
>> >>> That's what the changelog and svn history is for...
>> >>
>> >> Yes. I created them to try to use the roadmap system. See this:
>> >>
>> >>  http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/roadmap
>> >> and this:
>> >>
>> >>  http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/query?milestone=1.10.1&order=priority&col=
>> >>id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&col=compone
>> >>nt (which is kind of a changelog and a todo list)
>> >
>> > OK, well if you want to start maintaining this, please have a think
>> > about how we can modify the existing processes to accomodate it. At
>> > the very least, I would like to avoid the changelog duplication - can
>> > we drop that file, or auto-create it for example?
>>
>> Yes, we should definitely be able to do that. However, I think we
>> should do *both* for a while just to fill things with some data, so we
>> can reasonably compare the outcome. yes, it means duplicated work
>> during that time, but as long as we have the end-goal to drop one of
>> the two.
>
> Dropping one is not enough. We need to have more. And trac gives us more than
> just a changelog. So, I agree with Magnus. We should really check that trac
> works great enough for us before dropping any existing processes.

Here's to bring up a really old thread.

We've run it for a while now. Are we ready to drop the changelog and
use trac reports instead? Or are we ready to drop the changelog and
use git log? Or a combination, for different users?

(Hint: I hate the changelog file because I keep forgetting to update
it, and it sucks to handle it in the main repo due to how it
integrates with branches)

-- 
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-12-30 11:20:54
Subject: code.pgadmin.org
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-12-30 10:26:16
Subject: pgAdmin III commit: As usual, I forgot to update CHANGELOG

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