Re: New CF app deployment

On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:02 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> I'd like the ability to add a comment which does not get turned into an
> >> email.
>
> > I really don't ;)
>
> > The reason I really don't like that is that this now makes it impossible
> to
> > track the review status by just reading throught he mail thread. You have
> > to context-switch back and forth between the app and the archives. We had
> > this problem in the old system every now and then where reviews were
> > posted entirely in the old system...
>
> Yeah, people did that sometimes and it sucked. At the same time I see
> Jeff's point: 300-email threads tend to contain a lot of dross. Could we
> address it by allowing only *very short* annotations? The limiting case
> would be 1-bit annotations, ie you could star the important messages in a
> thread; but that might be too restrictive.
>

Right - to me that's the difference between annotation (per Roberts email
earlier, just "tagging" won't be enough, and I think I agree with that -
but a limited length ones) and a "comment".

It could be that I'm reading too much into Jeff's suggestion though - maybe
that's actually what he is suggesting.

The annotation would then "highlight" the email in the archives with a
direct link (haven't figured out exactly how to implement that part yet but
I have some ideas and I think it's going to work out well).

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/