On 2/27/07, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> Before we rehash recent debates, please, everybody, review them. Going
> over and over and over the same ground laboriously is really getting
> tiresome, and unfortunately it's also getting more frequent. It's *déjà
> vu *all over again.


History does tend to repeat itself, doesn't it? I just assumed it was never
discussed based on Josh's response.


database is appropriate and when it isn't. If we put it into a tracking
> system (presumably database backed) that would be another matter, but
> that has gone nowhere as usual.


A tracking system is what I was referring to, if it didn't have a front-end
then it would be quite pointless to have it in a database. Honestly, I
think Trac even does this, but I am far from familiar with that tool -- I
have just seen other projects with "roadmap" items which categorized TODO
tasks into future releases.


There is some point in putting it in a wiki where we can gather relevant
> documents, links to discussions etc. That's why the developers' wiki was
> established, AIUI.
>

To be honest, it may be adequate to maintain this solely through the Wiki.
The only thing I see lacking is specifically who is handling tasks, and what
release it is planned for. Perhaps, I am just looking in the wrong place?