On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Daniel Farina <dan...@heroku.com> wrote: > I do basically agree with this. I was reflecting on the bug tracker > issue (or lack thereof) for unrelated reasons earlier today and I > think there are some very nice things to recommend the current > email-based system, which are the reasons you identify above. Perhaps > the area where it falls down is structured searches (such as for > "closed" or "wontfix") and tracking progress of related, complex, or > multi-part issues that span multiple root email messages. > > Maybe just using the message-ids to cross reference things (or at > least morally: perhaps a point of indirection as to collapse multiple > bug reports about the same thing, or to provide a place to add more > annotation would be good, not unlike the CommitFest web application in > relation to emails) is enough. Basically, perhaps an overlay > on-top-of email might be a more supple way to figure out what process > improvements work well without committing to a whole new tool chain > and workflow all at once.
+1. This is almost word-for-word how I feel about it myself. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
