On 09/26/2012 07:23 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:19:14AM -0500, Steve Linabery wrote:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 08:38:04AM -0400, Mo Morsi wrote:
On 09/25/2012 08:44 PM, Justin Clift wrote:
I'm not sure what to use for the subdomain name. I don't love "issues"
because it sounds negative, like it's just for bugs. (Despite GitHub
using the "Issues" name.) I like "redmine" a little better, but if we
upgraded to ChiliProject or something, the name would be really
confusing. Maybe planning.aeolusproject.org or something? But please
don't let me derail this conversation into naming!
planning.aeolusproject.org works for me too.
Anyone have objections to that?
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
tracker.aeolusproject.org ?
-Mo
Ah nothing like a spirited naming discussion.
issues -> doesn't have a negative connotation to me (better than 'bugs'!), and
even so, who cares? However seems to me we're doing more than tracking issues.
planning -> seems to me to be the best description of what we're doing with
this tool
tracker -> adequate but I prefer planning.
I have a radical suggestion I would like to throw out for comment:
I was talking to Matt Hicks the other day, of OpenShift, and he claims
they are moving *their entire agile setup* to GitHub. Basically they're
going to ditch stories in Rally and move them to the GitHub issue
tracker instead.
Now, I'm the first to admit that the GitHub issue tracker isn't the
greatest tool ever to come down the pike, but you have to love the
integration with the rest of the GitHub services and so on.
So, rather than go through a whole dance with Redmine and the wiki and
the website and GitHub Pages and so on, would it be worth considering
just moving the whole shooting match to GitHub? If it's good enough for
OpenShift, I'd think it would be good enough for us.
(For the record, OpenShift has a rather nice "only the bot can merge
pull requests after it makes sure all the tests pass" setup that keeps a
tight lid on accidental merges. I think we would need something like
this too.)
Let me know what you think,
--Hugh
I am all in to reduce the number of tools necessary to manage our
workflow. Even if it's not better than the existing one, I agree, it's
good enough to replace Redmine entirely.
So +1
Imre
