From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Trac tickets |
Date: | 2010-12-30 10:32:04 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=OEhTVO9_TSDQqPNMCV22noskVXQDWMG2X+UzJ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 14:09, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
> Le vendredi 7 août 2009 à 13:35:51, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:48, Dave Page<dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Guillaume
>> >
>> > Lelarge<guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> >> Le jeudi 6 août 2009 à 13:10:24, Dave Page a écrit :
>> >>> Why are trac tickets being created for the recent change history?
>> >>> That's what the changelog and svn history is for...
>> >>
>> >> Yes. I created them to try to use the roadmap system. See this:
>> >>
>> >> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/roadmap
>> >> and this:
>> >>
>> >> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/query?milestone=1.10.1&order=priority&col=
>> >>id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&col=compone
>> >>nt (which is kind of a changelog and a todo list)
>> >
>> > OK, well if you want to start maintaining this, please have a think
>> > about how we can modify the existing processes to accomodate it. At
>> > the very least, I would like to avoid the changelog duplication - can
>> > we drop that file, or auto-create it for example?
>>
>> Yes, we should definitely be able to do that. However, I think we
>> should do *both* for a while just to fill things with some data, so we
>> can reasonably compare the outcome. yes, it means duplicated work
>> during that time, but as long as we have the end-goal to drop one of
>> the two.
>
> Dropping one is not enough. We need to have more. And trac gives us more than
> just a changelog. So, I agree with Magnus. We should really check that trac
> works great enough for us before dropping any existing processes.
Here's to bring up a really old thread.
We've run it for a while now. Are we ready to drop the changelog and
use trac reports instead? Or are we ready to drop the changelog and
use git log? Or a combination, for different users?
(Hint: I hate the changelog file because I keep forgetting to update
it, and it sucks to handle it in the main repo due to how it
integrates with branches)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-12-30 11:20:54 | code.pgadmin.org |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-12-30 10:26:16 | pgAdmin III commit: As usual, I forgot to update CHANGELOG |