Hi,
Gregory Casamento wrote:
TBH most of this thread is FUD. git itself solves almost all
these problems. IMHO, use GitHub as a remote for the repo (the
advantages are clear). If some don't like GitHub or have issues
with it, mirror. If there are concerns about vendor lock-in, then
track (or additionally track) in-repository.
I was simply trying to move things forward. If people really want me
to open back up savannah's bug tracker I will do so, but I believe
it's best to use the one here as the main one and that was for older
bugs. No new bugs should be opened there.
well, just "changing things" without any kind of discussion, agreement
and informing at least core developers is not good. Even if your mail
went through, it would have just been an "hey it is going to happen".
Without an export facility, the best thing we could do is
- ask savannah if we can open the bugtracker and forbid adding new bugs,
but leave it possible to resolve bugs
- if developers which have a github acocunt own an open bug, try to
reproduce it again and report it on the "new" system (e.g. GitHub) and
close it on savannah
The latter could be used for "cleanup".. still an not satisfactory
situation I think.
I think we have always been slow at closing bug, concentrating that
GNustep needs new features and bugs where left behind. I don't htink
this leaves a good impression, but every person is sensible to
different things.
For sure just freezing the old bug list is the wrong thing to do, it
will dishearten reporters, like it happened to Yavor.
Riccardo
