| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, Kenneth Marshall <ktm(at)is(dot)rice(dot)edu>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status) |
| Date: | 2006-08-17 05:36:37 |
| Message-ID: | 200608170736.39389.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> If you want the latter, the approach would be to keep pgsql-bugs and
> when a real issue comes up, bounce it to the bug tracker. Any
> subsequent email discussion should then get logged in the bug report.
That's what I want. I don't want the bug tracking system to be the
primary frontend to users off the street. Because quite frankly most
users are too confused to know what a real bug is. That doesn't mean
that I want a closed BTS, but a system that requires sign up and user
accounts (like Bugzilla) imposes the right barrier to random abuse in
my mind.
Note that RT stands for "Request Tracker", which on its face is a
different thing, namely a system to do tracking of requests by users
off the street.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2006-08-17 06:00:00 | Re: Adjust autovacuum naptime automatically |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2006-08-17 05:31:21 | Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status) |