On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Greg Stark<gsst...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Alvaro > Herrera<alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> Personally I still think debbugs would suit us perfectly, but 1. I don't >> have time to handle it, 2. nobody else believes this, 3. the debbugs >> developers are not very interested in helping us use it. > > I've been shouting about debbugs forever too. > > It's completely email based so we could just treat it as a mailing > list without having to go visit a web interface to stay up to date. We > could add CVS/whatever hooks so whenever a commit message says it > closes a bug it gets closed automatically. Effectively it would > require no operational changes for developers who would just > participate on a mailing list and commit changes like usual. > > It also has a web interface so you can go see the history to see the > pending bugs to work on and their history of course. But that's not > how we're accustomed to working and I fear anything like bugzilla > would require dedicated bug-wranglers like Bruce to keep the > connection between the email discussion and the bug tracker going > because the developers would ignore the web site and the bug reporters > would be unaware of any mailing list discussion.
Well, I think we're dropping a lot of the bugs early in the process, before they even get a response. Of course, a lot of the reason for that is because many of the "bugs" are actually usage questions, user error, completely lacking in relevant detail, problems with products other than Postgres, and/or feature requests dressed up as bugs to make us feel guilty about them. It seems to me based on my short tenure reading this mailing list that when someone provides a reproducible test case of Postgres verifiably DTWT it usually attracts plenty of attention and gets dealt with relatively quickly, usually with a friendly "thanks for the report!". There's nothing technological that prevents someone from quickly finding a list of the bugs that haven't gotten a response at all, as evidenced by the fact that I just did it upthread in less than 5 minutes going back to bug ~4900. The details of how to reproduce this are left as an exercise to the student (hint: threaded mail reader). Finding the bugs that were discussed but not resolved is harder, but probably a lot less worthwhile. A lot of those are exchanges of the form: Report: your product has a huge problem that would affect nearly every user Response: uh, we doubt it, because we'd've noticed that. can you provide a test case? <still waiting> I think there's definitely room for some better bug wrangling, but given the number of garbage bugs, the effort/reward ratio is likely to be pretty high. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
