On Fri, Feb 27, 2004 at 10:48:57AM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> RT: I've been using RT for OSCON, and am not wowed by it.Of course, I
> can say the same of BZ and GForge-Tracker. From my perspective, it's
> neither better nor worse than the other solutions, although the interaction
> w
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Email interface: it should not be beyond the wit of man to provide some level
> of email interface to any reasonable bug tracking system. Whether or not it is
> worth doing depends on the demand. Two obvious places for it would be 1) to
> allow initial
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
Paul,
Your main concern about RT isn't true, at least here at my office. I
installed RT, with no prior experience with any OSS tracker, back in
October, and it worked on PostgreSQL the first time. (PostgreSQL support was
one of the main reasons I chose it to
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Yeah, I looked into that when core started discussing this whole
>> thing awhile back. The Red Hat port of BZ to Postgres is perfectly
>> usable.
> Is it available anywhere?
Sure, download it off their front bugzilla page:
http:/
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
> A. GF-Tr does not support e-mail interaction at all.
Just curious, but:
1. how much work would be involved in adding that?
2. would the gforge developers be willing to integrate it in?
The reason I ask is that we have several PHP develop
Folks,
Tim Perdue sent me this.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
--- Begin Message ---
Josh Berkus wrote:
Tim,
To follow up on the previous question, there are a few features that I'm not
seeing in the GForge demo online. These are all features that our
developers w
There is a roundup version for postgresql. I have not tried it.
For python people, this is the ultimate solution. It is
customizable to death. I have the mailing list archives for
the last couple of months.
I like round up and use it. It has a great email interface
and a "nosy" list feature which
Mikhail,
> For a standalone bug/issue tracking tool take a look on
> http://roundup.sourceforge.net
I don't see PostgreSQL support listed -- just SQLite and MySQL.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
---(end of broadcast)--
Bort, Paul wrote:
My apologies, then! I was operating off of the statements
of others, and the
fact that the only RT impelementations I've used were running
on MySQL. So,
questions:
1) can you compare/contrast RT vs. BZ vs. Simplified
bug-tracking, like
GForge?
I've used Bugzilla
>
> My apologies, then! I was operating off of the statements
> of others, and the
> fact that the only RT impelementations I've used were running
> on MySQL. So,
> questions:
>
> 1) can you compare/contrast RT vs. BZ vs. Simplified
> bug-tracking, like
> GForge?
I've used Bugzilla for
Greg Stark wrote:
I also dislike BZ for aesthetic reasons. If one person is editing a ticket
while another person updates the same ticket, it refuses your edits and you
have to start all over. I think all the updates are stored in one big field.
AFAICS it's one row per comment, at least in th
Paul,
> Your main concern about RT isn't true, at least here at my office. I
> installed RT, with no prior experience with any OSS tracker, back in
> October, and it worked on PostgreSQL the first time. (PostgreSQL support was
> one of the main reasons I chose it to track issues on my
> PostgreSQL
Folks:
ALTERNATIVE BUG TRACKERS:
Jira: Core did look at and consider (and debate) Jira. Atlassian are
enthusiastic PostgreSQL supporters and offered to host Jira for us.
However, Jira is not OSS and for various reasons it would be difficult to
host a Jira installation at Hub.org. We're
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As for raising the barrier, you can presently submit bug reports to
> pgsql-bugs by either mail or webform. Most of the bug trackers I'm
> aware of are webform-only. I don't consider that a step forward,
> especially since a webform isn't very conducive to
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:17:13 -0500
"Bort, Paul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Greg Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> [...snip...]
> > I might suggest again RT. It's open source and has serious
> > commercial traction. The postgres port needs a lot of work
On Friday 27 February 2004 19:59, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I believe it should not be hard to do a one-time bulk registration of
> everyone on the lists, if that was desired.
I agree. If possible we could also run postgresql registration system where we
can track general usage of postgresql on var
Josh Berkus wrote:
Tom,
Possibly workable, but what's your definition of "registered user"?
Signing up via a webform, getting an e-mailed password back, logging in.
I'd hope that anyone subscribed to any of the mailing lists would be
considered registered, for instance. Not sure if
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Stark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 12:17 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [pgsql-www] Collaboration Tool Proposal
>
[...snip...]
> I might suggest again RT. It's open source
Tom,
> Possibly workable, but what's your definition of "registered user"?
Signing up via a webform, getting an e-mailed password back, logging in.
> I'd hope that anyone subscribed to any of the mailing lists would be
> considered registered, for instance. Not sure if we can do that with
> eit
Josh Berkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I actually sort of agree with Tom, although I don't want to raise the barrier
> too high. I'd suggest allowing all registered users to submit bugs.
Possibly workable, but what's your definition of "registered user"?
I'd hope that anyone subscribed to an
Josh Berkus wrote:
> PROPOSAL: GBorg --> GForge Migration
>
> Why do we want a full-service collaboration tool?
In terms of improving the hosting infrastructure, this would surely be a
step forward, but the problem with "collaboration" is not that the
tools are missing, it's that people are unwi
On Thu, Feb 26, 2004 at 09:16:38PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> In terms of improving the hosting infrastructure, this would surely be a
> step forward, but the problem with "collaboration" is not that the
> tools are missing, it's that people are unwilling to use any tools for
> issue tr
Josh Berkus wrote:
Peter,
So yes, I
think this is a reasonable plan, just don't expect "collaboration" to
suddenly appear out of nowhere.
Yeah. As my grandfather used to say, "You can lead a horse to water, but you
can't make him shrink." (granddad is under care, now).
Everyone:
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 15:41, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> Josh Berkus wrote:
>
> >Peter,
> >
> >
> >
> >>So yes, I
> >>think this is a reasonable plan, just don't expect "collaboration" to
> >>suddenly appear out of nowhere.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yeah. As my grandfather used to say, "You can
Robert Treat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 15:41, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Perhaps when BZ supports PG - some progress is being made on that front,
>> but it's not a done deal yet.
> I can't imagine the BZ plugin for Gforge would require you to use a
> second database system
Peter,
> So yes, I
> think this is a reasonable plan, just don't expect "collaboration" to
> suddenly appear out of nowhere.
Yeah. As my grandfather used to say, "You can lead a horse to water, but you
can't make him shrink." (granddad is under care, now).
Everyone: Further data: if we pre
Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, I looked into that when core started discussing this whole
> thing awhile back. The Red Hat port of BZ to Postgres is perfectly
> usable.
Is it available anywhere?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your fri
People,
The question is, do we need BZ right off or should we try GForge's lightweight
tool first?Personally I find that BZ is a little intimidating to new
users, particularly for searching on issues; as a result it tends to lead to
a lot of duplicate filings.
--
-Josh Berkus
Aglio Datab
Josh Berkus wrote:
> The question is, do we need BZ right off or should we try GForge's
> lightweight tool first?Personally I find that BZ is a little
> intimidating to new users, particularly for searching on issues; as a
> result it tends to lead to a lot of duplicate filings.
I think we had
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
The question is, do we need BZ right off or should we try GForge's
lightweight tool first?Personally I find that BZ is a little
intimidating to new users, particularly for searching on issues; as a
result it tends to lead to a lot of duplicate fi
Tom,
> Our first try at a bug tracking system, several years ago, was open to
> anybody to create entries, and we found that the signal-to-noise ratio
> went to zero in no time. Too many not-a-bugs, too many support
> requests, too few actual bugs. We went back to using the pgsql-bugs
> mailing
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think we had previously decided that we will not allow a random user
> off the street to file bug reports into whatever system we end up
> using.
Uh, why not? (And more to the point, why raise the barrier to entry on
reporting bugs?)
Individuals
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 15:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Yeah, I looked into that when core started discussing this whole
> > thing awhile back. The Red Hat port of BZ to Postgres is perfectly
> > usable.
>
> Is it available anywhere?
http://bugzilla.redhat.com/download/bugzill
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 13:41, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Perhaps when BZ supports PG - some progress is being made on that front,
> but it's not a done deal yet.
Redhat puts out a PG version of Bugzilla. It works pretty well.
However, we just dropped it in favor of Jira.
Jira is a lot friendlier
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would favor using Bugzilla over anything else just because I'm used
> to it (have to use it internally at Red Hat anyway).
I might suggest again RT. It's open source and has serious commercial
traction. The postgres port needs a lot of work for it to reall
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think we had previously decided that we will not allow a random user
>> off the street to file bug reports into whatever system we end up
>> using.
> Uh, why not? (And more to the point, why raise the bar
36 matches
Mail list logo
