From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Date: | 2004-02-27 14:29:24 |
Message-ID: | 403F5444.9080305@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers pgsql-hackers-win32 pgsql-www |
Josh Berkus wrote:
>Tom,
>
>
>
>>Possibly workable, but what's your definition of "registered user"?
>>
>>
>
>Signing up via a webform, getting an e-mailed password back, logging in.
>
>
>
>>I'd hope that anyone subscribed to any of the mailing lists would be
>>considered registered, for instance. Not sure if we can do that with
>>either BZ or GForge; anyone know?
>>
>>
>
>Usually it works the other way around; people can't subscribe until they've
>registered via web.
>
>
I believe it should not be hard to do a one-time bulk registration of
everyone on the lists, if that was desired.
Stepping back a bit and gathering a few threads.
BZ versions etc. There is finally some movement in the mainline BZ code
to get DB independence into it - and the first DB to benefit will be
Postgres. Dave Lawrence at RedHat appears to be working again on
landing this (after a long hiatus). See
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98304 and
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146679 . The reason I would
prefer to go with mainline BZ (assuming we go with BZ at all) is that my
past experience of upgrading BZ has not been pleasant, and I am sure it
would be even harder doing it from a fork like the RedHat one.
Signal to Noise. It's not at all clear to me why a bug tracking system
should have a worse signal to noise ratio than a mailing list with
similar access rules, especially since we also provide the facility to
log bugs through a web form directly off the postgresql.org home page.
But even if it does, that can be managed by good triage. That should
improve the ratio for all but those doing the triage. Personally, I'd be
surprised if it took one knowledgable person more than 30 minutes a day
to weed out the garbage (sorry for the mixed metaphor), and if the load
was spread across several people it would be just a few minutes a day
for any one of them, at a significant saving to everyone else.
Email interface: it should not be beyond the wit of man to provide some
level of email interface to any reasonable bug tracking system. Whether
or not it is worth doing depends on the demand. Two obvious places for
it would be 1) to allow initial logging of a bug via email, and 2)
periodically run query 'foo' and email me the results. Getting a once a
day digest of new bug reports might be quite nice in fact.
One size fits all: I understood that this discussion arose in the
context of a suggestion to migrate GBorg to a GForge base (a proposal I
generally support). What is right for the core project might well not be
right for GBorg projects. Perhaps a conservative approach might be to
try things out on GBorg/GForge and see how things go, without touching
how the core operates for now.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2004-02-27 14:51:27 | Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Previous Message | Dan Langille | 2004-02-27 12:35:16 | Re: features required for SQL 92 conformance |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Gamache | 2004-02-27 14:38:51 | Re: Any Gentoo users interested in a slotted PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2004-02-27 14:29:17 | Re: bgwriter never dies |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2004-02-27 14:51:27 | Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-02-27 07:11:14 | Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Shridhar Daithankar | 2004-02-27 14:51:27 | Re: [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal |
Previous Message | Chris Ryan | 2004-02-27 13:31:30 | Re: Feeds Integration |