Warning - my "development" views and experiences are highly e-mail dependant (i.e. linux-kernel style dependant). So if you don't like email, you probably shouldn't read my response below.
* Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080410 10:48]: > I click the patch for EXPLAIN progress info: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > The message comes up. > > Granted... very, very cool that this is all linked, so +1. > > But now what? I think the point is that the PostgreSQL development happens via e-mail and on mailing lists. So the goal is to point you to the mail, so you can join in on the development (i.e. by mail on the mailing lists). Maybe the archives should offer a way to download the raw message? In addition to all the normal stuff people want from archives that mhonarc seems to do poorly ;-) > * Where do I comment? In your mail program. > * Where do I submit my updated patch that fixes a small syntax error > that Greg made? Again - by mail, to -patches. And hopefully someone (the patch author, team of people, not Bruce) would update the "wiki/tracker" to say the patch has been revised, version X is $MSGID > * How do I track it in the future? > * Do I go to the wiki page again? Well, only if you want to "pull" the last status (i.e. someone else, not you may have updated it, and you haven't set yourself to be notified on changes). But again, since it's by email, you already have it all in your inbox, right? > * If I go to the wiki page again and click on the patch is it going > to take me right back to the archive page? Only if the wiki/tracker *hasn't* been updated. > * If it takes me right back to the archives page, am I going to be > plowing through 50 comments in the web archive format (which is > laborious and inefficient for this sort of thing) in order to find the > next relevant email (which would be the first one after I submitted my > update to the patch?) Uh, don't you read your e-mail already? Any comment/discussions on the patch would have had you in the reply-to chain. All nicely threaded in your mail reader or gmane, (or not-so nicely on archives.postgresql.org) > * After I submitted my comments where do I go? > * Do I submit them to -patches? > * Or hackers? > * What about cross threads? Well, generally your comments go as a "reply" to the patch, which should (in theory) be already on -patches > * Am I going to have to do that for every single patch I review? Well, you make it sound hard, but really, there is only "1" out-of-band action needed to happen to make this all work easily: Somebody (author, or team of people reading the mailling-lists) update the wiki/tracker when 1) New patch comes in 2) New version of patch is sent 3) A decision/consensus on a patch (or part of it) has been made > And in looking at this further, if I look at the Column Level > privelages patch on the wiki, the archive page goes to a -hackers email. > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2008-04/msg00049.php > > * Do I now respond to the hackers list? Well, that's part of the general problem of the archives.postgresql.org... > Lastly, how is this sustainable? I don't see anything that is reducing > Bruce's workload. (for example) The only think that will ever reduce Bruce's workload is him trusting that things aren't getting overlooked. The value to the work Bruce does is that he really doesn't let anything slip through the cracks. One way we can do that is by having a tracker/wiki which is an easy place for Bruce to see that: "Hey, this is/was looked after. I don't have to worry about this <thing>, I can delete it (and the followups to it) from my huge list of even more things to look at without expending lots of time re-reading the whole thread to make sure it didn't just die out" -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, [EMAIL PROTECTED] command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
