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.
regards, tom lane
