Received: from localhost (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 572FD9FA521 for ; Tue, 1 May 2007 14:53:01 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 88473-05 for ; Tue, 1 May 2007 14:52:55 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4 Received: from developer.pgadmin.org (developer.pgadmin.org [63.246.23.140]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E7689FA617 for ; Tue, 1 May 2007 14:22:04 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [172.16.0.66] ([89.241.153.3]) (authenticated bits=0) by developer.pgadmin.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l41HI5h2027887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 1 May 2007 17:18:06 GMT Message-ID: <46377733.3060703@postgresql.org> Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 18:21:55 +0100 From: Dave Page User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Josh Berkus CC: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Bruce Momjian , Tom Lane , Heikki Linnakangas , Simon Riggs Subject: Re: Feature freeze progress report References: <200705011452.l41EqPN10520@momjian.us> <46375C0B.9050305@postgresql.org> <200705010943.19924.josh@agliodbs.com> In-Reply-To: <200705010943.19924.josh@agliodbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200705/22 X-Sequence-Number: 102624 Josh, Josh Berkus wrote: > Is there a reason why the system needs to be primarily based on e-mail? I was > thinking that the patch manager would be entirely a web tool, with people > submitting and modifying a patch directly through a web interface. This > would be lots easier to build than an e-mail based system, and also far more > useful from a monitoring standpoint. I've worked with e-mail based systems > like RT and OTRS, and frankly they're extremely high-maintenance and suffer a > large amount of "lost" information. The reason for basing the system on email is simply that it minimises the changes required in the community process. If it were entirely web based, we'd have to change the way we all work to discuss patches in a forum style, rather than a list style. I have a sneaking suspicion that at least one of our most valued contributors might object to that. As long as the patch were initially submitted through the web interface so that it got assigned an ID, we could automatically track the initial, and followup threads on any of the lists as long as the ID is retained in the subject line. > We could also build a number of other things into the web tool, like a "You > are submitting this patch under BSD" disclaimer and pointers to the Developer > FAQ and other relevant documents. > Oh for sure. We could even do silly stuff like try to automatically determine if the patch is in diff -c format ;-) Regards, Dave