From: | Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Dunstan <pgsql(at)tomd(dot)cc> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Commit fest queue |
Date: | 2008-04-10 09:33:11 |
Message-ID: | 47FDDED7.5040707@kaltenbrunner.cc |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Dunstan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> The typical way to solve this is to have the tracker send an automatic
>> > notification email to a list saying "Hey, there's a new ticket at ,
>> > come and check it out".
>>
>> Unfortunately that is the typical way to "solve" this. And it's awful.
>> It's like the ubiquitous cryptic phone call in movies saying "can't talk
>> right now but there's something you should know. Meet me under the bridge"
>
> Yeah, it sucks, because people won't bother looking. It fails Tom's
> "sniff" test. (Although I can attest to having submitted a previously
> discussed patch to -patches and received *zero* feedback, even
> something like "we're too busy getting 8.2 out, come back later").
>
> What's wrong with a patch submitter submitting a patch to a tracker,
> but then emailing the list for actual discussion? "Hi there, I just
> upload patch #12345 which implements TODO item n, can people please
> have a look? I've done x, y and z, not sure about p and q". Then
> discussion still happens on-list which is a much better discussion
> medium, and the patch has a proper status page which the author can
> keep up to date with the latest version etc etc.
well what about having the tracker being subscribed to the list and let
it create a bug/patch/ticket id automatically for new mails - that way
all stuff is automatically tracked ? - That way it can be categorized in
the course of the following discussion but no history gets lost.
Stefan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mario Weilguni | 2008-04-10 09:46:55 | Re: Setting a pre-existing index as a primary key |
Previous Message | Tom Dunstan | 2008-04-10 09:21:53 | Re: Commit fest queue |