Re: Trac tickets
От | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Trac tickets |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4D1CC176.4040201@lelarge.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Trac tickets (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Trac tickets
Re: Trac tickets |
Список | pgadmin-hackers |
Le 30/12/2010 11:32, Magnus Hagander a écrit : > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 14:09, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> Le vendredi 7 août 2009 à 13:35:51, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:48, Dave Page<dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:22 PM, Guillaume >>>> >>>> Lelarge<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>>>> Le jeudi 6 août 2009 à 13:10:24, Dave Page a écrit : >>>>>> Why are trac tickets being created for the recent change history? >>>>>> That's what the changelog and svn history is for... >>>>> >>>>> Yes. I created them to try to use the roadmap system. See this: >>>>> >>>>> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/roadmap >>>>> and this: >>>>> >>>>> http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/query?milestone=1.10.1&order=priority&col= >>>>> id&col=summary&col=status&col=type&col=priority&col=milestone&col=compone >>>>> nt (which is kind of a changelog and a todo list) >>>> >>>> OK, well if you want to start maintaining this, please have a think >>>> about how we can modify the existing processes to accomodate it. At >>>> the very least, I would like to avoid the changelog duplication - can >>>> we drop that file, or auto-create it for example? >>> >>> Yes, we should definitely be able to do that. However, I think we >>> should do *both* for a while just to fill things with some data, so we >>> can reasonably compare the outcome. yes, it means duplicated work >>> during that time, but as long as we have the end-goal to drop one of >>> the two. >> >> Dropping one is not enough. We need to have more. And trac gives us more than >> just a changelog. So, I agree with Magnus. We should really check that trac >> works great enough for us before dropping any existing processes. > > Here's to bring up a really old thread. > Wait, it's only 17 months old ;) > We've run it for a while now. Are we ready to drop the changelog and > use trac reports instead? Or are we ready to drop the changelog and > use git log? Or a combination, for different users? > No to trac reports as they ain't complete now. Dave and I talked about that in Stuttgart, and we decided that quick bugs to fix won't have a trac ticket. We'll only use trac's bugtracker to keep track of unfixed bugs. I would be much more in favor to drop the changelog and use "git log" instead. > (Hint: I hate the changelog file because I keep forgetting to update > it, and it sucks to handle it in the main repo due to how it > integrates with branches) > Can't agree more :) -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com
В списке pgadmin-hackers по дате отправления: