Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Date: 2004-02-27 06:10:21
Message-ID: 200402262210.21836.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-www

Tom,

> Our first try at a bug tracking system, several years ago, was open to
> anybody to create entries, and we found that the signal-to-noise ratio
> went to zero in no time. Too many not-a-bugs, too many support
> requests, too few actual bugs. We went back to using the pgsql-bugs
> mailing list.

I actually sort of agree with Tom, although I don't want to raise the barrier
too high. I'd suggest allowing all registered users to submit bugs.
Needing to go through registration should severely reduce the "noise", even
if we give no restriction on who can register.

I field the Advocacy webform right now, and only get about 10 e-mails a day,
even though some of those are really support requests better handled by the
mailing lists. I think we could handle 5 bad bug reports a day.

> As for raising the barrier, you can presently submit bug reports to
> pgsql-bugs by either mail or webform. Most of the bug trackers I'm
> aware of are webform-only. I don't consider that a step forward,
> especially since a webform isn't very conducive to making good reports
> (it's hard to attach test cases, for instance).

Both the BZ and GForge webforms allow uploading files. And I'd far rather
have a single copy of a test case on our web site than a couple dozen being
e-mailed out.

--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2004-02-27 06:13:02 Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-27 05:25:31 Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-27 06:19:07 Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-02-27 05:26:06 Re: Tablespaces

Browse pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-27 06:19:07 Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-02-27 05:26:06 Re: Tablespaces

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-02-27 06:19:07 Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-02-27 05:25:31 Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal