Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Oh, so the bug is tracked by being part of the email reply list. That
> is a good idea. Now, how does that get assigned for non-bugs, like
> patches? Does any email sent to the lists that doesn't already have a
> bug number get one? That might be really valuable.
>
>
It would just clog the bug tracker and make it unusable.
I spent months on a working party on these and similar issues a few
years back, in a commercial setting. One of the big issues is when you
start tracking something. Bugs are a pretty simple case. Features are
much harder to handle. Someone comes up with an idea. There is a lot of
discussion. a consensus is arrived at to go forward. I think that's the
point at which we start tracking, but it's a judgement call. What is we
decide not to go ahead? Do we capture that in the tracker (with a
resolution of "rejected")?
One useful idea, not implemented by any of the OSS tracking / SCM
systems that I know of, is to tie the two together, i.e every commit
relates to a tracker item which captures the major discussions
surrounding it. (If there isn't a bug, it prompts you to start one,
which you can immediately mark as fixed if necessary). That way you can
go backwards and forwards between the code and the discussion that led
to it easily. Trust me, once you have worked with such a system you
appreciate the benefits.
Anyway, let me reiterate: bz has at least the start of an email reply
facility, and making that work if it doesn't already should not be
beyond us.
cheers
andrew