On Wed, Feb 14, at 09:42 Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> On 2/14/07, Ag. Hatzimanikas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What I would expect (at least in the future), from a bug-tracking technology
> > is some kind of sub-tickets/threads.
>
> They are called meta bugs in mozilla's bugzilla. See
> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61691> for an example of
> a meta bug.
>
Kind of and quite close to my wishing.
And indeed the consolidated ticket that we are talking about, it looks better
[1]
in bugzilla than Track.
Although the bugzilla future (meta bugs),it looks more like a "bug-chain";Bugs
that depends to each other with various and sometimes very powerful ways
(I played a bit with it and indeed looks impressing).
[parenthesis]
I thought that this bugzilla feature,could be useful at least for BLFS.
Instead of creating a different bug for every new release or for a vulnerability
of the "x" package,we could create just *one* main bug for the "x" package and
use
this feature to link to other bugs from that same package,let's say:
#1 curl
#100 7.15.3
#200 7.16.1
#300 exploit to libculr 7.16.1.
#400 7.17
[/parenthesis]
What I was talking about however,it wasn't some kind of dependency tree with
external
links to bugs/tickets (which sometimes can look like a labyrinth)...
but rather like: Bugs/tickets *into* one main/root bug/ticket.
Simple,easy and elegant.
But thanks for pointing out that to me.
I was thinking the other day for a bug tracking system that I could
suggest to a local organization and bugzilla is one choice I have to
check,although track looks more simple.
1.http://landfill.bugzilla.org/bugzilla-tip/showdependencytree.cgi?id=4985&hide_resolved=1
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
