Well, if we're considering some kind of trial stage I don't see why we couldn't setup a few different trackers and see what people think. Of course, that could well be setting us up for a bickshed big enough to play NFL football in... On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 10:10:26PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > I have thought about that, however I would at least at some level want a > > blessing. For example, if we did that would we do it with > > pgFoundry bug tracking? Or would we use Trac? Or Bugzilla? > > I think the main thing that's killed previous proposals in this line > is that we could never get a consensus on which bug tracker to use. > Personally I'd be OK with Bugzilla, since I use it at Red Hat already, > but I know that some hate it violently. > > There are also a set of issues involved in integrating any such project > with the pgsql-bugs list, which in the estimation of many of us is not > broken and does not need fixing. > > Old-timers will recall that we already had one bad experience with an > early open-source bug tracker, which has left people a bit shy of the > concept too. I think a large part of that had to do with confusion > between the purposes of bug *reporting* and bug *tracking*. A mailing > list does very well for reporting issues that might be bugs, but not so > well for tracking the status of acknowledged bugs. > > regards, tom lane > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate > subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx so that your > message can get through to the mailing list cleanly > -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
