Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > Personally I don't think we *know* what we want to do and that's why the wiki
> > is a good interim tool.
>
> Yup, that is *exactly* the point. A wiki page is a zero-setup-cost,
> flexible way of experimenting with tracking commit-fest issues.
> A year from now, we might have enough experience to decide that some
> more-rigidly-structured tool will do what we need, but we don't have
> it today. We spent enough time fighting the limitations of Bruce's
> mhonarc page that we ought to be wary of adopting some other tool that
> wants you to do things its way.
>
> Perhaps an example will help make the point. Throughout this past fest
> I was desperately wishing for a way to group and label related issues
> --- we had a pile of items focused around index AM API questions, and
> another pile focused around mapping problems (FSM/DSM/Visibility
> map/etc), and being able to put those together would have made it a
> lot clearer what needed to be looked at together with what else.
> On a wiki page it'd have been no trouble at all to create ad-hoc
> sub-headings and sort the individual items into whatever grouping and
I feel subgroups is something we are going to need from a bug or patch
tracker. The TODO list uses subgroups. I think a flat bug/patch list
is harder to understand.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
