X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 2E141D1B967; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 23:57:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 52553-01; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:57:06 -0400 (AST)
Received: from trolak.mydnsbox2.com (ns1.mydnsbox2.com [207.44.142.118])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 555E4D1B904; Thu, 26 Feb 2004 19:57:03 -0400 (AST)
Received: from dunslane.net (cpe-024-211-141-025.nc.rr.com [24.211.141.25])
	(authenticated (0 bits))
	by trolak.mydnsbox2.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i1R0tt128613;
	Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:55:55 -0600
Message-ID: <403E87D1.2000202@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 18:57:05 -0500
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20031114
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Collaboration Tool Proposal
References: <200402260912.54001.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<15111.1077835640@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200402261452.49385.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200402270020.37548.peter_e@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <200402270020.37548.peter_e@gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org
X-Archive-Number: 200402/216
X-Sequence-Number: 3781



Peter Eisentraut wrote:

>Josh Berkus wrote:
>  
>
>>The question is, do we need BZ right off or should we try GForge's
>>lightweight tool first?    Personally I find that BZ is a little
>>intimidating to new users, particularly for searching on issues; as a
>>result it tends to lead to a lot of duplicate filings.
>>    
>>
>
>I think we had previously decided that we will not allow a random user 
>off the street to file bug reports into whatever system we end up 
>using.  I see it primarily as a bug *tracking* system, not a bug 
>*reporting* system.
>
>  
>

I don't recall that there was a consensus about that. The difference 
between BZ's "unconfirmed" and "new" states is that the latter means it 
has been triaged. See http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/bug_status.html .

I certainly don't think we should impose such a restrictive rule on 
every project that we might host on a GForge installation.

cheers

andrew