+1 for Github issues per repo. Repos can be cross referenced in markup. Assignees can be assigned labels can be assigned. Projects (roll up across repos) can be assigned. Milestones can be assigned. UI is simple and effective Query by any of the above attributes. The interfaces is present when on Github - there is no need secondary login/account The content can be rich.
We can add issue from email if someone does not have access to github. -1 for any other external issue tracking system. They add no value above what is built into ghithub. They complicate coordination (PR closes issue). In a general sense: The choice if an external system violates 3NF. I do not agree that issues OR Code changes will continue to come in by email. I believe the root cause of that historical dataflow is an artifact bad process and tooling. When the correct process are in place, as is the correct tooling, there can be support for historical manual ways, but it will be less used because it is not as efficient, it is not fool proof or effective. David -----Original Message----- From: Gregory Nutt [mailto:spudan...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 5:29 PM To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]Bug Tracking I presume that there will be vote coming in the next few days for the Bug Tracking solution. This thread, then, is really the [DISCUSS] thread prior to the vote, right? I have no idea what the voting options will be, but we should probably label this as [DISCUSS] so people will appreciate that it is important for their opinions to be heard.
