On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > That's probably one reason people aren't jumping on this. Because > there is no tracker out there that people actually *like*...
I think this is a point worth serious thought. The bug trackers I've used have been mostly terrible; saying that they are to bug tracking what CVS is to version control is insulting CVS. They're more like what editing RCS files in vi is to version control - i.e. worse than not having version control. To put that in practical terms, I think everyone (including people like Tom and I) who (a) are old curmudgeons or anyway middle-aged curmudgeons and (b) would spend much more time in bed with any system that we adopted than the average hacker would agree that the current system is kind of a pain. But there is no point in replacing it with something else unless that new thing is going to be significantly better than what we are doing now. And it's not entirely clear that such a thing exists. There are certainly people out there, and even on this list, who will tell you that system ABC is great. But for any given ABC there are also people who will tell you that it's got significant problems. We don't need to change anything to get a system that's got significant problems; we already have one. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
