Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
| From | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms |
| Date | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEzKgWEf1hYRw9Q7ksdOPT_2HRNbu1XWQZu_skXK9Oyh+w@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
| In response to | Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms (Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg@gmail.com>) |
| Responses |
Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms
(Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg@gmail.com>)
Re: Is a modern build system acceptable for older platforms (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>) |
| List | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, May 28, 2018, 10:03 Yuriy Zhuravlev <stalkerg@gmail.com> wrote:
пн, 28 мая 2018 г. в 16:42, Pierre Ducroquet <p.psql@pinaraf.info>:On Monday, May 28, 2018 4:37:06 AM CEST Yuriy Zhuravlev wrote:
> > Can't see getting rid of those entirely. None of the github style
> > platforms copes with reasonable complex discussions.
>
> I disagree. A good example of complex discussions on github is Rust
> language tracker for RFCs:
> https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues
> and one concrete example: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2327
> I have no any problem with complex discussions on github.
It is indeed hard to follow on github, and would be even worse with bigger
threads.
Email readers show threads in a hierarchical way, we can see who answered to
who, discussions can fork to completely different aspects of an issue without
being mixed together.Anyway I have no this feature on GMail web interface. But yes, sometimes it's usefull.
It is correct that Gmail is incapable of this in the web browser. Many other email systems can though, and Gmail still speaks imap so you can use those if you prefer.
Which outlines a huge advantage of email as the communications medium. This allows each and every person to pick a tool and interface that suits them. Some prefer Gmail web, others mutt, others gnus. And they all work.
With something like github issues everybody is forced to use the same, more limited, interface,with no choice in the matter.
> Anyway, it's much better than tons of emails in your mailbox without tags
> and status of discussion.
A github thread does not show what I read / what I have to read, does it now ?On github you have notifications about new messages in subsribed issues, and if you follow links from https://github.com/notifications these links disappear.
This works similar to unread threads in most mail programs, including Gmail, doesn't it? And the subscribed issue functionality you can easily get in Gmail by using starred threads for example?
And the read/unread can be handled both on a thread basis and individual message basis depending on preference, but with issues it's only on thread level.
Also, don't forget about browser bookmarks and other plugins for that, web much more flexible than emails.
I would argue the exact opposite - mail is a lot more flexible than using github issues and that's one of the most important reasons I prefer it.
(and there are of course many ways to tag and categorize your email, many more so than with issues. Specifically bookmarks will of course depend on your mail program)
There are definitely advantages with issues for tracking, such as getting a more structured central repository of them (but that requires very strict rules for how to apply them and huge amounts of maintenance effort), but as a communications tool I'd say email is vastly superior, particularly thanks to the flexibility.
/Magnus
pgsql-hackers by date: