Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Donnerstag, 10. April 2008 schrieb Tom Lane: >> Another is that the email list provides a >> "push" mechanism for putting the proposed patch under the noses of a >> bunch of people, a few of whom will hopefully take a sniff ;-). >> A tracker is very much more of a "pull" scenario where someone has to >> actively go looking for pending/proposed changes.
> In my mind the pull mechanism is exactly one of the major features I would > expect from a proper tracking system, so I can "pull" and work on the issues > that affect me at a time when it is convenient for me, instead of at the time > when the "push" happens. Of course. The point is we need both, since each way scratches a different itch. Also, I'm quite hesitant to abandon a working process --- our email-based procedures have served the project pretty well over the past ten-plus years, else we'd not be here having this discussion. So, at least in the beginning, I want to layer any tracking process over what we already do, not make a big change for unproven results. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers