| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |
| Date: | 2008-02-06 23:50:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20137.1202341834@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
> Le Wednesday 06 February 2008 21:35:54 Peter Eisentraut, vous avez crit:
>> Yes, I feel we could use a group writeable patch queue of some sort.
>> Perhaps an IMAP server setup could do the job.
> I've read some developers appreciating the way review board works:
> http://review-board.org/
> http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/
> http://code.google.com/p/reviewboard/wiki/UserBasics
Hmm, the info on that last page might be out of date, but what it says is
that the only SCMS they really support 100% is SVN. The other ones they
claim support for don't work [well/at all] with the post-review tool.
It looks interesting though, and would alleviate a few of the problems
people have mentioned with reviewing stuff that's posted as diffs.
Has anyone here got any direct experience with it?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-02-06 23:59:52 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-02-06 23:12:31 | Re: build environment: a different makefile |