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

Re: Trac tickets

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Trac tickets
Date: 2010-12-31 09:52:14
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:30, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> No to trac reports as they ain't complete now. Dave and I talked about
>> that in Stuttgart, and we decided that quick bugs to fix won't have a
>> trac ticket. We'll only use trac's bugtracker to keep track of unfixed bugs.
>> I would be much more in favor to drop the changelog and use "git log"
>> instead.
>>> (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)
>> Can't agree more :)
> The CHANGELOG is supposed to be a list of "changes that are
> interesting to the user", ie. the changes that we include in release
> notices etc. Git log includes a ton of extra stuff, and would require
> significant manual filtering at release time to produce the change log
> data.

Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
as well. And it misses stuff (I *know* that I keep forgetting and
don't always pick up on it and fix it later, and I'm pretty sure
others do as well). So you'd have to make a pass through all the git
logs *anyway* if you want to keep it up to date.

 Magnus Hagander

In response to


pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-12-31 09:54:22
Subject: Re:
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2010-12-31 09:26:22
Subject: Re: Email notification pgAgent

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group