Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't think we need decicated bug transferrers. Typically, when someone
> reports a problem by email, the first step is that some developer or other
> expert responds (unless the reporter gets blown away by fellow users as
> clueless :-)). So the natural extension of this process would be that the
> person doing the analysis records the problem.
Yeah, that sounds like it would work.
I still think it would be a good idea to have one or two people actively
in charge of the overall health of the bug repository --- cross-linking
duplicate bugs, making sure fixed bugs get closed out, in general
correcting misinformation when they find it. This wouldn't be a large
time commitment AFAICS, but without somebody applying pressure in the
right direction I think that the general quality of information in
the database would inevitably slide downhill.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
