On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 03:18:49PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
> > I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors
> > would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger
> > items but hopefully at least some w
On 01/11/2016 03:31 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
We can argue about if it's actually an easier management interface ;)
(as long as it is manageable via email as well as web?)
I'd agree with Robert in that it will cause some more such bickering --
but only because the discussions become visib
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:31 AM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> On 01/10/2016 06:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> No arguments with what was written above.
+1. Very well written.
>
>
> If we had an "issue" tracker rather than a bug tracker, I'd expect a
>> lot more unproductive bickering.
On 01/10/2016 06:19 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
[snip]
No arguments with what was written above.
If we had an "issue" tracker rather than a bug tracker, I'd expect a
lot more unproductive bickering.
This I disagree with. It wouldn't be any worse than we have now. An
issue tracker (if it is a goo
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> /me waves hand
>>
>> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people that
>> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders.
>
> Sort of like how they could also have helped out with cf management
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:12 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
> This really sounds like you're looking for leverage to fix one problem
> by finding other problems that you hope to solve with the same hammer.
> That's a recipe for a tool that solves neither problem well and gets
> ignored by the both sets of u
On 1/8/16 9:07 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Dunno about that. While a CF manager doesn't necessarily have to have
a commit bit, I think he/she probably does have to be someone who is known
and respected on the -hackers list. Otherwise, nagging to finish patches
is likely to be ignored or even counterpro
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake
> >> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people
> that
> >> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders.
>
> > Sort of l
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake
>> There are quite a few contributing companies that likely have people that
>> could help out with this in an educated fashion but aren't coders.
> Sort of like how they could also have helped out with cf management?
Du
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I don't completely agree with that. I have often wanted to know when
> a specific item was added to the TODO page, and/or its individual edit
> history.
Sure, there might be other things it would be better at. But my point
is that it would have
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> On 01/07/2016 12:32 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation:
>>>
>>> "Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list"
>>>
>>> "Oh, we've obsolesced that, that
On 01/07/2016 12:32 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation:
"Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list"
"Oh, we've obsolesced that, that was added to the TODO before we had Y"
... by auto-closing TODO items at a certai
On 1/7/16 1:49 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
Yeah, we could also get rid of this conversation:
"Here's a patch for X, which is on the TODO list"
"Oh, we've obsolesced that, that was added to the TODO before we had Y"
... by auto-closing TODO items at a certain age.
Even if not auto-closed at least
On 01/07/2016 10:30 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I don't completely agree with that. I have often wanted to know when
> a specific item was added to the TODO page, and/or its individual edit
> history. With only a unified history of the entire TODO page, and
> with no wiki equivalent of "git blame", f
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness.
>> An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more
>> reasonable, but it certainly wouldn't be f
On 01/06/2016 04:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness.
An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more
reasonable, but it certainly wouldn't be free.
Eh, a bug
On 1/6/16 9:22 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Jim Nasby writes:
Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit
fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is really
just about reading through email activity to
On 1/6/16 6:18 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness.
An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more
reasonable, but it certainly wouldn't be free.
Eh, a bug track
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jim Nasby writes:
>> Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit
>> fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is really
>> just about reading through email activity to see where things are at.
>
> They
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah. The other problem is that stuff that's actually small doesn't tend
> to hang around undone for long, so there's not really a broad array of
> stuff just waiting for someone to have a little time. If we had a more
> actively maintained TODO
Jim Nasby writes:
> Somewhat related to that, I don't believe there's any reason why commit
> fest managers need to be committers; it seems like the job is really
> just about reading through email activity to see where things are at.
They don't need to be. Michael Paquier did a fine job with
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Right. Personally, I feel the TODO has pretty much outlived it's usefulness.
> An issue tracker would make maintaining items like this a lot more
> reasonable, but it certainly wouldn't be free.
Eh, a bug tracker that tracks actual bugs would be
On 01/06/2016 03:57 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/6/16 5:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Having said that, it occurs to me that one way to contribute without
actually writing C code would be to try to drive those unfinished
discussions to consensus, and come up with specs for features that people
agree are w
On 1/6/16 5:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Having said that, it occurs to me that one way to contribute without
actually writing C code would be to try to drive those unfinished
discussions to consensus, and come up with specs for features that people
agree are well-thought-out. Conversely, establishing
Robert Haas writes:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
>> I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors
>> would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger
>> items but hopefully at least some would.
> I agree with this. Curating such
On 1/6/16 2:18 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors
would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger
items but hopefully at least some would.
I agree with this. Curati
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Catalin Iacob wrote:
> I also think a list of small things suitable for new contributors
> would help attracting them. Not all would stick and go on to larger
> items but hopefully at least some would.
I agree with this. Curating such a list is a fair amount of w
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:11 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list of "hey,
> here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we come to that is the
> TODO, which isn't well known and has almost no items for newbies (and the
> newbie items t
On 01/05/2016 06:30 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 1/5/16 8:19 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list
of "hey, here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we
come to that is the TODO, which isn
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On 01/05/2016 04:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake
> >wrote:
> >>linuxhiker: git interface! Bug tracker for this anywhere?
> >
> >Potential answer: Yes. As of now, pgsql-docs for doc issues, and
> >pgsql-bugs for actual
On 1/5/16 8:19 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list
of "hey, here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we
come to that is the TODO, which isn't well known and has almost no
items for
Jim, all,
* Jim Nasby (jim.na...@bluetreble.com) wrote:
> Which doesn't help anyone, because neither of those provide a list
> of "hey, here's stuff you could do to contribute". The closest we
> come to that is the TODO, which isn't well known and has almost no
> items for newbies (and the newbie
On 01/05/2016 04:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could
easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described
the basic workflow and the individua
On 1/5/16 6:53 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could
easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described
the basic workflow and the individual was excited
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could
> easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I described
> the basic workflow and the individual was excited.
>
> His first question?
>
Hello,
So I was on #postgresql today. I convinced a newer user that they could
easily contribute to PostgreSQL even if it was just doc patches. I
described the basic workflow and the individual was excited.
His first question?
linuxhiker: git interface! Bug tracker for this anywhere?
J
On Wednesday 30 September 2015 14:41:34 you wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:08:56PM +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> > Linux kernel project uses bugzilla (https://bugzilla.kernel.org)
>
> AIUI this is not mandatory for kernel hackers, and more opt-in from a
> some/many/a few(?) subsystem maintaine
Nathan Wagner wrote:
> 1: Can a bug be more than "open" or "closed"?
>
> I think yes. At least we probably want to know why a bug is closed. Is it
> not
> a bug at all, not our bug, a duplicate submission, a duplicate of another bug,
> something we won't fix for some reason (e.g. a bug against
I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked a
message to reply to.
Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a bugs
mailing list, I put together something.
I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This
part
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Nathan Wagner
> wrote:
>>
>> I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked
>> a
>> message to reply to.
>>
>> Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Nathan Wagner
wrote:
> I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked
> a
> message to reply to.
>
> Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a
> bugs
> mailing list, I put together something.
>
FWIW, I th
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to
> > store and parse email messages].
>
> Yeah. It actually made most of the work pretty easy. It's availa
On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 3:08 AM, Nathan Wagner wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to
> > store and parse email messages].
>
> Yeah. It actually made most of the work pretty easy. It's availa
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 04:30:49PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> That would be the key part, wouldn't it? Nice that you have [code to
> store and parse email messages].
Yeah. It actually made most of the work pretty easy. It's available
with a bunch of other code at https://pd.if.org/git/ if anyo
On 10/04/2015 03:42 PM, Nathan Wagner wrote:
> I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This
> part was easy, since I have already written a pg backed usenet server and had
> the code hand for storing and parsing out bits of rfc 2822 messages.
That would be the key
I don't have the original message for this thread, so I arbitrarily picked a
message to reply to.
Since what has been asked for is a bug *tracker*, and we already have a bugs
mailing list, I put together something.
I downloaded the archives for pgsql-bugs, and fed them into a database. This
part
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>>
>> - Bug numbers are sometimes preserved in commit messages, but they
>> never make it into release notes. This actually seems like something
>> we could improve pretty easily and wi
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Steve Crawford <
scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 7:16 AM, David Fetter wrote:
>
>> ...What we're not fine with is depending on a proprietary system, no
>> matter what type of license, as infrastructure...
>>
>>
> Exactly. Which is
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 10/01/2015 07:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Playing devil's advocate ... would this really do much other than bloat
>> the release notes? The entire assumption of this thread is that people
>> don't, or don't want to, use the release notes to f
On 10/01/2015 05:10 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Andres Freund writes:
>>> On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the
initial thread as well of course - which mos
On 10/01/2015 07:55 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Playing devil's advocate ... would this really do much other than bloat
> the release notes? The entire assumption of this thread is that people
> don't, or don't want to, use the release notes to find out what got fixed;
> they'd rather search a tracker.
On 10/01/2015 08:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I'm inclined to think that commit messages are not really the right medium
for that at all. Commit messages ought to be primarily text for
consumption by humans. If we had a tracker,
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
>> On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> As one of the people who do most of the gruntwork for release notes,
>>> I can tell you that that sort of fixed-format annotation is useless
>>> and usually annoying. I c
On 10/01/2015 07:48 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
But using the bugtracker for the discussion itself is usually not a win.
I know you said usually but:
In fact, I'd say in most cases it's counterproductive because it forces
a single tool upon everybody, instead of email which allows each person
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As one of the people who do most of the gruntwork for release notes,
>> I can tell you that that sort of fixed-format annotation is useless
>> and usually annoying. I can see what branches you fixed the bug in
>> anyway, fro
On 2015-10-01 11:07:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund writes:
> > On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the
> >> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do
> >> themselves today. But
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the
>> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do
>> themselves today. But there is in itself nothing that prevents them from
>> d
On 2015-10-01 16:48:32 +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> That would require people to actually use the bug form to submit the
> initial thread as well of course - which most developers don't do
> themselves today. But there is in itself nothing that prevents them from
> doing that, of course - other
On 10/01/2015 10:35 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and e
Robert Haas writes:
> - Bug numbers are sometimes preserved in commit messages, but they
> never make it into release notes. This actually seems like something
> we could improve pretty easily and without a lot of extra work (and
> also without a bug tracker). If every committer makes a practice
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure
> wrote:
> > I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
> > blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
> > mailing lists are insufficient i
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
> mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and expected to be
> taken on faith: *How* is i
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
> > On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
> >> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
> >> something happen here". The la
> On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Josh Berkus writes:
>>> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
something happen here". Th
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:50 AM, Torsten Zuehlsdorff <
mailingli...@toco-domains.de> wrote:
> On 01.10.2015 00:27, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Josh Berkus writes:
>>
>>> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
had step
On 01.10.2015 00:27, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus writes:
On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
something happen here". The lack of any volunte
On 9/30/15 4:31 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
I wish people would at least consider this as an option because it
integrates a ton of different features together. It has *the potential*
to eliminate our need to keep maintaining CommitFest and buildfarm and
could
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Browne writes:
>> It may very well be *worse* than that; it seems quite likely to me that if
>> an issue tracker is not being continually curated by substantially ALL of
>> its users, then you don't get any of those things. That *is*
On 09/30/2015 03:49 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Well, it's hard for anyone to volunteer when we don't know what the
actual volunteer tasks are. I certainly intend to do *something* to
support the bug tracker system, but I don't know yet what that something is.
I volunteer to
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Well, it's hard for anyone to volunteer when we don't know what the
> actual volunteer tasks are. I certainly intend to do *something* to
> support the bug tracker system, but I don't know yet what that something is.
I volunteer to do something too, as long as I don't have t
On 09/30/2015 03:28 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus writes:
On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
som
On 09/30/2015 03:27 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus writes:
>> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
>>> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
>>> something happen here". The lack
Josh Berkus writes:
> On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
>> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
>> something happen here". The lack of any volunteers suggests strongly
>> that th
On 09/30/2015 03:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'd be feeling a lot more positive about this whole thread if any people
> had stepped up and said "yes, *I* will put in a lot of grunt-work to make
> something happen here". The lack of any volunteers suggests strongly
> that this thread is a waste of tim
Christopher Browne writes:
> It may very well be *worse* than that; it seems quite likely to me that if
> an issue tracker is not being continually curated by substantially ALL of
> its users, then you don't get any of those things. That *is* a lot more
> pessimistic, and considerably likely, as
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
>> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
>> mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated
On 30 September 2015 at 14:31, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2015 11:23 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>
>> It's well and nice to think that an issue tracker resolves all of this,
>> and, if we
>> had tiny numbers of issues, we could doubtless construct a repository
>> indicating so. (Seems
On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> I wish people would at least consider this as an option because it
> integrates a ton of different features together. It has *the potential*
> to eliminate our need to keep maintaining CommitFest and buildfarm and
> could also replace mediawiki.
>
> If pe
On 09/30/2015 11:33 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Who exactly is "some guy sitting in a den pushing out code"? And if
that's not a patronizing put down I don't know what is. If you're
referring to me you couldn't be more wrong. I have been a development
director managing a couple of substantial tea
On 09/30/2015 02:16 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 09/30/2015 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Frankly, an insistence on moving to some integrated solution is likely
to result in the adoption of nothing. And your "educating hackers who
don't understand" is more than a little patronizing. What m
On 09/30/2015 11:23 AM, Christopher Browne wrote:
It's well and nice to think that an issue tracker resolves all of this,
and, if we
had tiny numbers of issues, we could doubtless construct a repository
indicating so. (Seems to me that the bit of "fan service" for GitHub's
bug tracker fits into
On 30 September 2015 at 12:26, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>
>> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
>> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
>> mailing lists are insufficient is simply s
On 09/30/2015 10:45 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Frankly, an insistence on moving to some integrated solution is likely
to result in the adoption of nothing. And your "educating hackers who
don't understand" is more than a little patronizing. What makes you
think your experience in software develop
On 09/30/2015 01:31 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
If people are hell-bent on every tool being separate then fine, but I
get the distinct impression that everyone is discarding GitLab out of
hand based on completely bogus information.
Right, we need to s
On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
> blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
> mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and expected to be
> taken on faith: *How* is it insuffici
On 09/30/2015 12:02 AM, Jim Nasby wrote:
If people are hell-bent on every tool being separate then fine, but I
get the distinct impression that everyone is discarding GitLab out of
hand based on completely bogus information.
Right, we need to stop thinking that every task is not interrelated.
On 09/30/2015 07:44 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
I'm not trolling in any way. I'm just challenging you to back up your
blanket assertions with evidence. For example, you're assertion that
mailing lists are insufficient is simply stated and expected to be
taken on faith: *How* is it insufficient a
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Kam Lasater wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
>>> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
>>
>> Here ar
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:08:56PM +1300, Gavin Flower wrote:
> Linux kernel project uses bugzilla (https://bugzilla.kernel.org)
AIUI this is not mandatory for kernel hackers, and more opt-in from a
some/many/a few(?) subsystem maintainers. Some parts use it more, some
less or not at all.
> and
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
>> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
>
> Here are the problems I'd like to solve:
>
> 1. "Was this issue fix
Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
> > That's a very good point. I think Github and other sites are already
> > blocked in countries like India and Cuba.
>
> Github is not blocked in India and was never as far as I know. Well our
> government rece
On 9/29/15 12:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andres Freund writes:
On 2015-09-29 13:40:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
I think you missed my point: gitlab would then believe it's in charge of,
eg, granting write access to that repo. We could perhaps whack it over
the head till it only does what we want and
On 9/29/15 3:36 PM, Oleg Bartunov wrote:
...What we're not fine with is depending on a proprietary
system, no
matter what type of license, as infrastructure...
Exactly. Which is why I was warning about latching onto features
only available in th
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
>
>
> That's a very good point. I think Github and other sites are already
> blocked in countries like India and Cuba.
Github is not blocked in India and was never as far as I know. Well our
government recently blocked some porn sites, but
On 09/29/2015 03:46 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Alvaro Herrera writes:
Merlin Moncure wrote:
I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
In my opinion, this thread is about a bug tracker, not a patch tracker.
We already ha
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
>> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
> In my opinion, this thread is about a bug tracker, not a patch tracker.
> We already have a patch tracking system which w
On 09/29/2015 03:08 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
Here are the problems I'd like to solve:
1. "Was this issue fixed in a Postgres update? Which one?"
2. Not losing track of m
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> I've read this email about three times now and it's not clear at all
> to me what a issue/bug tracker brings to the table.
In my opinion, this thread is about a bug tracker, not a patch tracker.
We already have a patch tracking system which works very well. (We are
not ab
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Joshua D. Drake
wrote:
> On 09/29/2015 07:25 AM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Kam Lasater wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Last night I heard that Postgres had no issue/bug tracker. At first I
>>> thought the guy was trolling me. Ser
Oleg Bartunov wrote:
> me too, but I have to mention one problem we should have in mind - it's
> independency from political games (sanctions). Think about developers from
> Russia, who one day may be blocked by Github, for example.
That's a very good point. I think Github and other sites are
1 - 100 of 208 matches
Mail list logo
