From: | Joshua Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Mail thread references in commits |
Date: | 2016-11-19 17:25:34 |
Message-ID: | CAJvJg-SKFaqfNmFA-ALsnXMhchfijQdcrS2TQsZdvDHypByr_Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
My solution requires that everything have an issue. E.g., hackers becomes a
tracker.
Sincerely,
Jd
On Nov 19, 2016 09:04, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > I wonder if now is the time (again) to consider an issue tracker.
>
> That would make the problem at hand worse, not better, because you'd
> get nothing at all for cases that were too trivial to make an issue
> tracker entry for, or that the committer couldn't be bothered to go
> find in the issue tracker. We don't even have very widespread adherence
> to the cite-a-message-thread convention yet (so far as I can tell,
> Andres and I are the only committers doing it at all). Adding another
> step of bureaucracy to our processes is just going to fail miserably.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-11-19 17:31:12 | Re: [sqlsmith] Crash on GUC serialization |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-11-19 17:20:07 | Re: pg_dump -s -b |