Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote:
>> So in order to start a brand new bikeshed to paint on, have we even
>> considered a very trivial workflow like letting the bugtracker
>> actually *only* track our existing lists and archives. That would
>> mean:
>>
>> * Mailing lists are *primary*, and the mailing list archives are
>> *primary* (yes, this probably requires a fix to the archives, but that
>> really is a different issue)
>> * New bugs are added by simply saying "this messageid represents a
>> thread that has this bug in it", and all the actual contents are
>> pulled from the archives
>> * On top of this, the bug just tracks metadata - such as open/closed
>> more or less. It does *not* track the actual contents at all.
>> * Bugs registered through the bugs form would of course automatically
>> add such a messageid into the tracker.
> That's pretty much exactly what I think would be most useful.
I kinda wonder why the CF app doesn't work like that, actually.
(Yeah, I know the poor thread linking in the archives is an issue.)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
