W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-ts@w3.org > June 2001

Re: Recap and action items

From: Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 17:06:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <15133.18888.367594.988189@cj42289-a.reston1.va.home.com>
To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
Cc: www-dom-ts@w3.org

Philippe Le Hegaret writes:
 > I would prefer a mailing list than a SF system. It will be much easier
 > for me to fix any problem on the W3C mailing list server than an external
 > one. Also I know that our server is good at that (i.e. support for embedded

  We've had good experiance with the SF services for Python.  While we
mostly use our own mailserver, SF is using the same software we do
(and I'm working next door to the maintainer for that package!).
  We configure the SF "trackers" to send email on all updates to the
items; each can be configured independently to send mail or not, and
either on updates or new entries only.
  At one point ("before SF") we used a mailing list as our patch
manager, and found that was completely unworkable -- discovering what
was happening and making sure each patch was addressed in some way (if
only to kick it back for more information) was virtually impossible.
Using a real database (as with the SF tracker) makes a huge
difference.  Being able to get email when issues are updated gives us
the ability to keep on top of actions as they occur, without having to
give up the query interface.
  So I vote for the SF tracker which feeds a mailing list, which can
be hosted either at the W3C or SF.  All input should go through the
tracker.


  -Fred

-- 
Fred L. Drake, Jr.  <fdrake at acm.org>
PythonLabs at Digital Creations
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 17:07:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 6 April 2009 12:58:44 GMT