On ons, 2012-04-18 at 08:28 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > It's very tempting to assume that the problem we're trying to solve > must already have been well-solved by someone else, and therefore we > ought to use their thing instead of inventing our own. But that > presumes that our problem is exactly the same as other people's > problem, which may not really be true.
It's also very tempting to assume the opposite. ;-) > IME, bug trackers typically work best when used by a tightly > integrated team. Well, very many loosely distributed open-source projects use bug trackers quite successfully. > So I think Greg has exactly the right idea: we shouldn't try to > incorporate one of these systems that aims to manage workflow; Um, isn't half of the commitfest app about workflow? Patch is waiting for review, who is the reviewer, patch is waiting for author, who is the author, patch is ready for committer, who is the committer? And every week or so the commitfest manager (if any) produces a report on patch progress. Isn't that exactly what these "workflow management" systems provide? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
