Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status)
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44E5BFB4.4000408@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: BugTracker (Was: Re: 8.2 features status)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > >> Have you tried to use debbugs? I agree with Greg Stark that it's a >> better fit for our current procedure, while enabling better >> traceability. >> > > The principal strike against debbugs seems to be that the source code is > not readily available and/or isn't updated regularly. If we could get > current sources we'd probably end up maintaining our own fork ... OTOH, > given all the enthusiasm being expressed in this thread, somebody would > volunteer to do that no? > > Other than that not-small problem, I agree that debbugs seems like an > excellent fit to our existing habits. > > > Well, the enthusiasm was for use, not for maintaining a fork :-) I had a brief look at the code (literally less than 5 minutes). The good news is that it is admirably small. A fork isn't a bad idea, though, especially as a pgfoundry project. I can think of several excellent candidates for such a project (no names, no pack drill) ;-) I should mention that it's a perl app. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: