From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Managing the community information stream |
Date: | 2007-05-06 09:56:28 |
Message-ID: | 463DA64C.7030507@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> The idea of the patch number in the subject line works with that
> streaming model because it merely marks streams so they can be grouped.
> The defining event that marks the stream is a post to the patches list.
> We already number posts to the bugs list, so in a way we could improve
> tracking there and somehow link it to TODO items and patch submissions,
> but because many TODO items are not the result of bug reports but come
> out of general discussions, I am not sure tracking would work as well
> there. And what about features? Do you start assigning numbers there,
> and what is your trigger event? In my opinion, as you start trying to
> place more structure on the stream, the stream itself starts to degrade
> in its dynamism and ease of use. To me, that is the fundamental issue,
> and risk.
Bruce,
I cannot really add to that except to say that you neatly summarized
what I've completely failed to in my last few emails to Andrew. I agree
completely.
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2007-05-06 13:17:45 | Re: plperl vs. bytea |
Previous Message | Nathan Buchanan | 2007-05-06 06:07:15 | Re: storage of sensor data with Fourier transforms |