Re: [Python-Dev] New bugtracker project
Guido van Rossum:
[David]
For one thing, it was basically impossible for people with only a peripheral view of the database (managers, QA folks) to get accurate pictures of the database. Nothing that can't be fixed if one has a real DB backend.
Currently it uses bsddb or anydbm. Backends for SQL or ZODB should certainly be writeable, the question is whether they'll be useful.
Looking through the roundup code, a SQL backend looks like a good idea. The code for finding elements needs to be rewritten (currently it's not database specific and just scans everything -- that doesn't scale), but other than that it should be relatively straightforward.
A ZODB backend should also be writebale, though I don't have enough experience with ZODB to say whether making all classes inherit from Persist and removing the marshalling code is enough. ;-)
Both backends are limited to read-only access from outside Roundup, though. If not, triggers and journalling won't work.
Speaking of which, how real is RoundUp's DB backend? Does it use MySQL? *Could* it use MySQL? *Should* it use MySQL?
Umm, please s/MySQL/SQL/, as there are more databases out there -- besides, recommending MySQL is sure to provoke a flame war. (ACID may or may not work 100%, no views, no sub-selects, ...)
On 23 May 2002 at 7:35, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
Looking through the roundup code, a SQL backend looks like a good idea. The code for finding elements needs to be rewritten (currently it's not database specific and just scans everything -- that doesn't scale), but other than that it should be relatively straightforward.
The *straightforward* way of doing an SQL backend would be to have (almost) everything in one table, defined as (int key, binary stuff). That's utterly useless for querying, since even the DB doesn't know what it contains.
Contrast with Bugzilla's data model: http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/html/dbschema.html
[That's not to say the problem is unsolvable - just not straightforward.]
-- Gordon http://www.mcmillan-inc.com/
As a followup to a previous message, I remembered one problem with the original roundup nosy-list mechanism, and that's the "adding to cc list by replying to a email" behavior. It's the key behind the nosy-list concept, and I must say that it worked great when we had a small team of developers (4-5) and beta users. When we scaled up to over 10 people and thousands of users, then that behavior was much too generous, and you hesitated to make a comment on a bug for fear of being attached to that bug forever. Bugzilla is quite explicit about who gets added to the "candidate cc list" by default (the "component owner", the "QA contact" and the "reporter"), and one has to explicitely add oneself to the bug (although the UI could be smarter, since bugzilla knows you're logged in if you are, it should be a one-click operation). Again, I'm not arguing for Bugzilla as much as for the features and control offered by bugzilla.
As an aside -- Gordon, or anyone else looking at these issues, if you want to file fake bugs, post attachments, etc. on our bugzilla installation (e.g. Komodo or ActivePython) to see how the thing "feels", feel free. If you need privileged access (e.g. to be a component owner), we can do that too. see e.g. bugs.activestate.com/ActivePython.
--david
[David]
As a followup to a previous message, I remembered one problem with the original roundup nosy-list mechanism, and that's the "adding to cc list by replying to a email" behavior. It's the key behind the nosy-list concept, and I must say that it worked great when we had a small team of developers (4-5) and beta users. When we scaled up to over 10 people and thousands of users, then that behavior was much too generous, and you hesitated to make a comment on a bug for fear of being attached to that bug forever.
There should be a way to remove yourself. Possibly by sending another email (but there should also be an explicit web control that shows whether you're on the list or not and lets you change that). And there should be a way to send a reply without being attached. But the default of being attached seems fine.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Could you move this dicussion to a SIG ?
Thanks,
mal> Could you move this dicussion to a SIG ?
Yeah, we need to room to discuss types.py... ;-)
S
Hi,
Gordon McMillan:
The *straightforward* way of doing an SQL backend would be to have (almost) everything in one table, defined as (int key, binary stuff). That's utterly useless for querying, since even the DB doesn't know what it contains.
Right. That wasn't what I had in mind, though. ;-)
participants (7)
-
barry＠zope.com -
David Ascher -
Gordon McMillan -
Guido van Rossum -
M.-A. Lemburg -
Matthias Urlichs -
Skip Montanaro